Display options
Cite
Nyman TJ, Antfolk J, Lampinen JM, et al. Line-Up Image Position in Simultaneous and Sequential Line-Ups: The Effects of Age and Viewing Distance on Selection Patterns. Front Psychol. 2020;11:1349doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349.
Nyman, T. J., Antfolk, J., Lampinen, J. M., Korkman, J., & Santtila, P. (2020). Line-Up Image Position in Simultaneous and Sequential Line-Ups: The Effects of Age and Viewing Distance on Selection Patterns. Frontiers in psychology, 111349. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349
Nyman, Thomas J, et al. "Line-Up Image Position in Simultaneous and Sequential Line-Ups: The Effects of Age and Viewing Distance on Selection Patterns." Frontiers in psychology vol. 11 (2020): 1349. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349
Nyman TJ, Antfolk J, Lampinen JM, Korkman J, Santtila P. Line-Up Image Position in Simultaneous and Sequential Line-Ups: The Effects of Age and Viewing Distance on Selection Patterns. Front Psychol. 2020 Jul 01;11:1349. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349. eCollection 2020. PMID: 32714240; PMCID: PMC7342269.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2020 Jul 01;11:1349. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349. eCollection 2020.

Line-Up Image Position in Simultaneous and Sequential Line-Ups: The Effects of Age and Viewing Distance on Selection Patterns.

Frontiers in psychology

Thomas J Nyman, Jan Antfolk, James Michael Lampinen, Julia Korkman, Pekka Santtila

Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Arts, Psychology and Theology, Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland.
  2. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, New York University Shanghai, Shanghai, China.
  3. Department of Psychological Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States.

PMID: 32714240 PMCID: PMC7342269 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01349

Abstract

It is known that children and older adults produce more false alarms in target absent line-ups and that weaker facial encoding increases choosing bias. However, there has been no investigation of how age or facial encoding strength impacts line-up position selections in either sequential or simultaneous line-ups. In the present study, we presented participants with four live targets (one by one) while manipulating sequential and simultaneous line-ups between participants and target present and target absent line-ups within participants. In order to investigate facial encoding strength, we presented the targets at distances between 5 and 110 m. Our main hypotheses were that children due to deficits with inhibition would be more biased toward indiscriminate selections in the first position of sequential line-ups compared with subsequent line-up positions and that first position selections would increase for all age groups as facial encoding became weaker. In simultaneous line-ups, we expected to find a top row bias. In our sample (

Copyright © 2020 Nyman, Antfolk, Lampinen, Korkman and Santtila.

Keywords: age; distance; eyewitness; facial encoding strength; line-up; position effects; sequential; simultaneous

References

  1. Cognition. 2009 May;111(2):219-47 - PubMed
  2. Am Psychol. 1993 May;48(5):553-71; discussion 572-80 - PubMed
  3. Psychol Bull. 2000 Mar;126(2):220-46 - PubMed
  4. Child Dev. 2004 Mar-Apr;75(2):505-22 - PubMed
  5. Law Hum Behav. 2019 Aug;43(4):358-368 - PubMed
  6. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Jan 12;113(2):304-9 - PubMed
  7. Law Hum Behav. 2012 Jun;36(3):247-55 - PubMed
  8. Law Hum Behav. 2015 Feb;39(1):1-14 - PubMed
  9. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Oct;25(5):1695-1716 - PubMed
  10. Law Hum Behav. 2005 Apr;29(2):151-72 - PubMed
  11. Psychol Bull. 2015 Nov;141(6):1228-65 - PubMed
  12. Mem Cognit. 2019 Apr;47(3):428-440 - PubMed
  13. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2002 Sep;8(3):155-67 - PubMed
  14. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 Aug;137(3):495-513 - PubMed
  15. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Jul;10(4):419-33 - PubMed
  16. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Jun;34(7):1080-91 - PubMed
  17. Law Hum Behav. 2008 Dec;32(6):526-35 - PubMed
  18. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005 Jul;31(4):768-88 - PubMed
  19. Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Feb;12(1):43-65 - PubMed
  20. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2012 Dec;18(4):346-60 - PubMed
  21. Mem Cognit. 2005 Jul;33(5):783-92 - PubMed
  22. Law Hum Behav. 2019 Dec;43(6):527-541 - PubMed
  23. Law Hum Behav. 2012 Dec;36(6):513-26 - PubMed
  24. Law Hum Behav. 2018 Jun;42(3):215-226 - PubMed
  25. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2017 Mar;23(1):71-84 - PubMed
  26. Behav Res Methods. 2017 Dec;49(6):2235-2254 - PubMed
  27. Memory. 2018 Oct;26(9):1297-1309 - PubMed
  28. Psychon Bull Rev. 2014 Dec;21(6):1489-94 - PubMed

Publication Types