In their descriptions, eyewitnesses often refer to a culprit's distinctive facial features. However, in a police lineup, selecting the only member with the described distinctive feature is unfair to the suspect and provides the police with little further information. Fo... View more
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behaviour Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25, 49-59.
Bruce, V. (1982). Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processing in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 73, 105-116.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987a). The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 233-258.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987b). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Putting context into context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 629-637.
Cutler, B. R., Penrod, S., O'Rourke, T. E., & Martens, R. K. (1986). Unconfounding the effect of contextual cues on eyewitness identification accuracy. Social Behavior, 2, 113-134.
Knapp, B. R., Nosofsky, R. M., & Busey, T. A. (2006). Recognizing distinctive faces: A hybrid-similarity exemplar model account. Memory and Cognition, 34, 877-889.
Luus, C. A., & Wells, G. L. (1991). Eyewitness identification and the selection of distractors for lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 43-57.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
Nosofsky, R. M., & Zaki, S. R. (2003). A hybrid-similarity exemplar model for predicting distinctiveness effects in perceptual old-new recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 1194-1209.
Patterson, K. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1977). When face recognition fails. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Learning and Memory, 3, 406-417.