↓ Skip to main content

Individual differences in eyewitness accuracy across multiple lineups of faces

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Individual differences in eyewitness accuracy across multiple lineups of faces
Published in
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41235-018-0121-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew J. Russ, Melanie Sauerland, Charlotte E. Lee, Markus Bindemann

Abstract

Theories of face recognition in cognitive psychology stipulate that the hallmark of accurate identification is the ability to recognize a person consistently, across different encounters. In this study, we apply this reasoning to eyewitness identification by assessing the recognition of the same target person repeatedly, over six successive lineups. Such repeat identifications are challenging and can be performed only by a proportion of individuals, both when a target exhibits limited and more substantial variability in appearance across lineups (Experiments 1 and 2). The ability to do so correlates with individual differences in identification accuracy on two established tests of unfamiliar face recognition (Experiment 3). This indicates that most observers have limited facial representations of target persons in eyewitness scenarios, which do not allow for robust identification in most individuals, partly due to limitations in their ability to recognize unfamiliar faces. In turn, these findings suggest that consistency of responses across multiple lineups of faces could be applied to assess which individuals are accurate eyewitnesses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 51%
Computer Science 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 April 2024.
All research outputs
#7,439,131
of 25,610,986 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#201
of 366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,252
of 341,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,610,986 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.