Abstract
A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities
of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program’s
comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions.
For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the
suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter
delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than
in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup
conditions.
of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program’s
comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions.
For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the
suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter
delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than
in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup
conditions.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-12
- DOI 10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7
- Authors
- Nancy K. Steblay, Department of Psychology, Augsburg College, 2211 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
- Journal Law and Human Behavior
- Online ISSN 1573-661X
- Print ISSN 0147-7307
- Journal Volume Volume 35
- Journal Issue Volume 35, Number 1
