Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Face Recognition

Identification Evidence

Earwitness Testimony

Aspect of Witnesses

The identification of a suspect form a lineup

STUDY

Meta-analysis of 9 studies

Post-lineup confidence is a stronger predictor of identification accuracy than is pre-lineup confidence

The pre-lineup confidence- accuracy correlation is trivial in magnitude.

Mistaken identifications

Much of aspects have little affect on performance

Gender, intelligent, confident, a member of a public or a police officer

The recognition of face involves 3 stages

Is the face familiar?

How is the face similiar

What is the name of the person?

Voice identification is more difficult than visual identification

Voice identification is more likely than visual identification to be wrong

Suggestive lineup procedure

increase the likelihood of eyewitnesses making an identification regardless of whether they truly believe the perpetrator is present or not.

65+ make more mistakes

not due to poor vision

they have difficulty remembering

Unfair lineup procedure

increase the likelihood of eyewitnesses identifying the suspect rather than other members of the lineup.

Mistakes can occur at any stage

Feel pressure to make an identification

Familiarity

Person may fail to recognize an unfamiliar face or conversely incorrectly recognizing an unfamiliar face as familiar.

Expectations

e.g. we expect bad things to have been committed by nasty people and good thing by attractive person.

General public share ideas of what certain types of criminal look like

The recognition of unfamiliar faces is more likely to be influenced by various estimator and system variables, including viewing angle, lighting, exposure time and the introduction of misleading information.

Lineup instruction bias

Instructions lead eyewitness to assume that the perpetrator in in the lineup

Archival Study

S

The present study of the accuracy of witness descriptions confirms the results commonly found in both laboratory and real-life studies:

Suspect "stands out" from the lineup because there are an in sufficient number of foils and/or they do not match the witness's description of the perpetrator

Foil bias

Completeness of the descriptions was poor

S

Descriptions contained more permanent than temporary characteristics

Suspect is wearing clothing that is same or similar to that worn by the perpetrator during the crime.

Clothing bias

Descriptions are usually vague and general; witnesses mostly describe general characteristics of the offenders, such as gender, race, height, and age. In describing these characteristics the witnesses are more often correct than wrong.

Who conducts the lineup

U

Improving the accuracy of identification evidence

All members of the lineup are presented simultaneously

The person conducting the lineup should not know which member of the lineup is the suspect.

Presentation bias

Structure of the lineup

Instruction on viewing

Eyewitnesses should be told that perpetrator may or may not be presentin the lineup

U

Suspect should not stand out from the lineup on the basis of eyewitness' descriptions of the perpetrator or any other aspects that draw attention to the suspect.

When the police officer conducting the identification procedure unintentionally

Investigator bias

False & Recovered Memory

Also, person conducting the identification procedure does not know which member of the lineup is the suspect

Confidence, time and memory

Obtaining confidence statements

1990s childhood sexual abuse and other form of abuse that were no reported until adulthood.

Negative relationship between the time eyewitnesses take to identify a suspect and the accuracy of the identification

U

Eyewitness should be asked to provide confidence statements regarding their identifications prior toany feedback on whether or not they identified the suspect.

False memory

Confidence-accuracy relationship is weak.

Recovered memory

Represent unconscious fabrication

Recovery of previously inaccessible memories

Extensive use of memory recovery techniques can lead to false memory syndrome.

Innocence Project

The Innocence Project, founded in 1992 by Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck at Cardozo School of Law, exonerates the wrongly convicted through DNA testing and reforms the criminal justice system to prevent future injustic

Masumiyet Projesi

Prof. Dr. Sevil Atasoy

Started at İstanbul Üniversitesi Adli Tıp Kurumu in 1996

Conclusion

The Fallibility of Eyewitness Testimony

Perception and memory

The evidence comes from eyewitness testimony should be supported with other evidence otherwise they are not enough to decide whether a suspect is guilty or not.

Passive, copying processes like a camera

Descriptive Evidence

The interviewing of witnesses provides the police with an opportunity to gather important information that is descriptive evidence

Active and constructive processes

However

Contamination is possible due to use of leading questions and/or introduction of misleading information

Study

collided

bumped

contacted

hit

"About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?"

Attention selectively on certain aspects

fill in the "gaps"

smashed collided bumped hit contacted

broken glass

Reconstructive nature of memory

Emotion & Memory

smashed %16

hit %7

Weapon Focus Effect

Flashbulb Memories

Appropriate techniques need to be used to get information from eyewitnesses.

System Variables

&

Estimator Variables

"Did another car pass the red Datsun while it was stopped at the stop sign/ yield sign?"

Reduction in the ability to identify other aspects of the crime including the perpetrator.

Attention to perpetrator's weapon

Experimental Studies

Weapon condition

Control condition

Fixate on the object for a longer period of time in the weapon contition

Less acurate in their decriptions of the person

Real Life

This effectmay be accounted for by the presence of weapon increasing already high levels of stress.

Ethical issues

Context of eyewitness testimony

Detailed and accurate memories created during significant and unexpected events

Archival & Field

Experimental

Memories for violent events can be highly accurate.

higher level of emotional arousal

a high level of surprise

a high level of emotional arousal

Attributional Biases, Schemas & Stereotypes

More detail

poorer accuracy

factors that influence the accuracy of eyewitnes testimony

Difficult to determine of accuracy

Interpret the same crime differently according to their expectations

are under the control of the criminal justice system

75% in the consistent information

41% in the inconsistent information

are not under the control of the criminal justice system

see what they expect to see

&

ignore what they do not expect to see

Affect retrieval stage

Occur at the event

Affect encoding stage

Schemas and stereotypes reflect people's knowledge and understanding of the world and may lead to attributional biases that direct attention and influence memories for people and event

Include the capacity of investigatory procedures used by the criminal justice system to gather accurate descriptive and identification evidence.

e.g., police interview techniques and lineup procedures.

Witness characteristics

age, sex, race and personality

Event characteristics

time of day, duration of the incident and seriousness of the incident...

more than 50% of cases

What happens to the original memories?

Alteration hypothesis

Original memory no longer exist it Transformed into a new memory

Coexistence theory

Original and the altered memories and that both can potentially be recalled.

more acurate information

Improving the accuracy of descriptive evidence

can be taught in a few hours

Source misattribution theory.

Cognitive Interview

Develops a rapport

Introduction

Source monitoring error lead to misleading information being incorrectly attributed to the original memory

Asks to provide witness's account of events

Should not interrupt

Open ended questions

Open-ended narration

Follow up questions to make sure that he or she has provided an exhaustive account of events

Probing

Opportuniy to correct errors and provide additional information

Check that is accurate

Review

Collects any necessary details regarding the witness and ends the interview.

Witness is given the opportunity to get touch if he or she remember anything else abount the event.

Close

EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY

EMİNE BİLGEN

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi