Mock jurors read a fictional trial transcript that manipulated the consistency of the witness's first identification (ID) decision (positive versus foil versus non-) with the second lineup and in-court IDs of the defendant. The number of inconsistencies (two versus four versus eight) between the witness's description of the criminal and the defendant's appearance also was manipulated. Jurors perceived the description of the criminal as more reliable when the witness reported fewer versus greater descriptor inconsistencies. Jurors also perceived the witness's first photo lineup ID and in-court ID as more reliable, and the witness more favorably overall when fewer versus greater descriptor inconsistencies were presented. Jurors rated the witness's first photo lineup ID as more reliable and the witness more favorably overall when the witness presented consistent versus inconsistent IDs. Higher guilt ratings to the defendant were provided when the witness made fewer versus greater descriptor inconsistencies and/or when the witness made a non- versus a foil ID. Jurors rendered more guilty verdicts when the witness reported fewer versus greater descriptor inconsistencies, however, only when the witness presented consistent ID decisions. Copyright 2012 American Journal of Forensic Psychology.

Additional Metadata
Journal American Journal of Forensic Psychology
Citation
O'Neill, M.C. (Monica C.), & Pozzulo, J. (2012). Jurors' judgments across multiple identifications and descriptor inconsistencies. American Journal of Forensic Psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 39–66).