Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“I Had a Confidence Epiphany!”: Obstacles to Combating Post-Identification Confidence Inflation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

Research shows that eyewitnesses often become more confident with their selections from a lineup over time, a problem labeled “confidence inflation.” Wells et al. (1998) Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603–647 suggested that eyewitnesses provide a confidence statement immediately following their selection to capture an unadulterated measure of confidence. Three experiments tested the effectiveness of introducing such a statement to combat the effects of confidence inflation on mock-juror judgments. All experiments provided evidence that the attributions participants formed about the eyewitness’ confidence inflation differentially impacted their judgments. Although mock-jurors generally discredited eyewitnesses who showed confidence inflation and sometimes lowered probability of guilt ratings for the defendant, a clear exception occurred when mock-jurors attributed the inflation to an epiphany. Use of post-identification confidence statements to decrease the impact of confidence inflation in the courtroom may be insufficient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Significantly more participants in the inflation + challenge condition affirmed that the defense attorney questioned the eyewitness about her confidence inflation, as compared to the 99% control and mere inflation condition, χ 2 (2, N = 138) = 59.53, p < .001. However, while greater than 94% of participants correctly denied this challenge in the 99% control and mere inflation conditions, only 63% of participants correctly recognized the challenge in the inflation + challenge condition.

  2. Two versions of the 99% control were used (eyewitness was 99% positive on both occasions versus eyewitness was 99% positive in court and did not give a prior confidence statement). However, these conditions did not significantly differ, so they were combined into a single control condition.

  3. Because important comparisons were limited to comparing each of the inflation conditions to the 99% control, the more liberal LSD (Least Significant Difference) procedure was used for multiple comparisons. Information about other comparisons is presented for informative purposes only. This rationale applies to all other cell comparisons in subsequent tables.

  4. When only participants who answered all manipulation checks correctly were retained for analyses, the same pattern of means occurred, but the effects were larger.

  5. When only participants who answered all manipulation checks correctly were retained for analyses, the same pattern of means occurred, but the effects were larger.

References

  • Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, G. L., & Cutler, B. L. (1996). Effects of inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony on mock-juror decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 170–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, G. L., Narby, D. J., & Cutler, B. L. (1995). Effects of inconsistent eyewitness statements on mock-jurors’ evaluations of the eyewitness, perceptions of defendant culpability and verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradfield, A., & McQuiston, D. E. (2004). When does evidence of eyewitness confidence inflation affect judgments in a criminal trial? Law and Human Behavior, 28, 369–387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradfield, A. L., & Wells, G. L. (2000). The perceived validity of eyewitness identification testimony: A test of the five Biggers criteria. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 581–594.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, N., & Burke, A. (2002). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 353–364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, N., & Hupfield, R. M. (2004). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and witness group identity on mock-juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 493–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2006). The confidence–accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: Effects of lineup instructions, foil similarity, and target-absent base rates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 11–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buckhout, R. (1974). Eyewitness testimony. Scientific American, 231, 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1995). Mistaken identification: The eyewitness, psychology, and the law. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolnik, L., Case, T. L., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Stealing thunder as a courtroom tactic revisited: Processes and boundaries. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 267–287.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fein, S. (1996). Effects of suspicion on attributional thinking and the correspondence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1164–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fein, S., Hilton, J. L., & Miller, D. T. (1990). Suspicion of ulterior motivation and the correspondence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 753–764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fein, S., McCloskey, A. L., & Tomlinson, T. M. (1997). Can the jury disregard that information? The use of suspicion to reduce the prejudicial effects of pretrial publicity and inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1215–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Oxford, England: Row, Peterson.

  • Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organizations. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (pp. 219–266). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanaker, S., & Nazareth, A. (1988). Attributed rape victim’s fault as a function of her attractiveness, physical hurt, and emotional disturbance. Social Behaviour, 3, 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassin, S. M., Williams, L. N., & Saunders, C. L. (1990). Dirty tricks of cross-examination: The influence of conjectural evidence on the jury. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 373–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, H. H. (1972). Causal schemata and the attributional process. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 151–174). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K. C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565–579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, D. S., Read, J. D., & Sharma, K. (1998). Accuracy and confidence in person identification: The relationship is strong when witnessing conditions vary widely. Psychological Science, 9, 215–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, R. C. L., Lim, R., Marando, L., & Cully, D. (1986). Mock-juror evaluations of eyewitness testimony: A test of metamemory hypotheses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 447–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous vs. sequential presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & O’ Connor, F. J. (1989). Mock-juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses: A replication and extension. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 333–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1994). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 714–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, S. L., & Holmes, J. G. (1993). Seeing virtues in faults: Negativity and the transformation of interpersonal narratives in close relationships, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 707–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuschatz, J. S., Lawson, D. S., Fairless, A. H., Powers, R. A., Neuschatz, J. S., Goodsell, C. A., & Toglia, M. P. (2007). The mitigating effects of suspicion on post-identification feedback and on retrospective eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 231–247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptomatic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. Jr. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96, 58–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenney, E. R., MacCoun, R. J., Spellman, B. A., & Hastie, R. (2007). Calibration trumps confidence as a basis for witness credibility. Psychological Science, 18, 46–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1998). “Good, you identified the suspect”: Feedback to eyewitnesses distorts their reports of the witnessing experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 360–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., Ferguson, T. J., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1981). The tractability of eyewitness confidence and its implications for triers of fact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 688–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Ferguson, T. J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440–448.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Luus, C. A. E. (1990). Police lineups as experiments: Social methodology as a framework for properly conducted lineups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 106–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Amy Bradfield and Dawn McQuiston for allowing us to use their trial transcripts in Experiments 1 and 2. We would also like to thank the Australian Research Council for funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychological Sciences Building, Purdue University, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907-2081, USA

    Eric E. Jones & Kipling D. Williams

  2. School of Psychology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, 5001, SA, Australia

    Neil Brewer

Authors
  1. Eric E. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kipling D. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Neil Brewer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric E. Jones.

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, E.E., Williams, K.D. & Brewer, N. “I Had a Confidence Epiphany!”: Obstacles to Combating Post-Identification Confidence Inflation. Law Hum Behav 32, 164–176 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9101-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9101-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation