Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to learn more

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by YU, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by GEISELMAN, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Effects of Constructing Identi-Kit Composites on Photospread Identification Performance

CAROLINE J. YU

University of California, Los Angeles

R. EDWARD GEISELMAN

University of California, Los Angeles

Previous research has found some forms of post-event activity, such as working with a sketch artist or viewing mugshots, to negatively affect the subsequent identification performance of an eyewitness. The present experiment examined potential carryover effects of forming an Identi-kit composite and writing a verbal description on the identification of an assailant from a photoarray. Both interventions were compared to a no-treatment (control) condition. Forming an Identi-kit composite increased witness sensitivity, causing subjects to be less likely to select any photo. In contrast, writing a description increased the likelihood that subjects identified the photo of the assailant. Neither intervention affected the likelihood of misidentification. Alternative theoretical explanations for the results and implications for field procedures are explored.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 20, No. 3, 280-292 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854893020003005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?