首页> 外文期刊>Legal and criminological psychology >Public policy and sequential lineups
【24h】

Public policy and sequential lineups

机译:公共政策和顺序安排

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The claim that sequential lineups are superior to simultaneous lineups and that our knowledge of sequential lineups is sufficient to warrant their being required by law is reviewed for the validity of both strong and weak claims of sequential superiority, adherence to principles of research design, and the needs of public policy. We conclude, (1) there is little evidence to support the claim that sequential presentation of photos is responsible for lower levels of false identifications, (2) the evidence is weak that the aggregation of factors commonly labeled as the sequential lineup together produce lower levels of false identifications without additional offsetting effects, (3) much of the literature contains several confounds in research design and additional offsetting effects that question its overall utility, (4) recent research shows that the superiority of sequential lineups is restricted to specific ranges on other study design variables, and (5) the corpus of research on sequential lineups does not satisfy the needs of policy sufficiently to justify its mandated use as the required identification procedure throughout the criminal justice system.
机译:对于顺序优势的强项和弱性主张的有效性,对研究设计原则的坚持以及对顺序设计的坚持,我们对顺序联盟优于同步联盟的主张以及我们对顺序联盟的知识足以保证法律要求的主张进行了审查。公共政策的需求。我们得出结论,(1)很少有证据支持照片的顺序呈现导致较低级别的虚假标识的说法,(2)证据薄弱,即通常标记为顺序列表的因素聚集在一起产生较低级别的错误标识错误识别而没有其他抵消作用,(3)许多文献在研究设计中存在一些混淆,并且对抵消其总体效用产生了额外的抵消作用,(4)最近的研究表明,顺序阵容的优越性仅限于其他方面的特定范围研究设计变量,以及(5)顺序阵容研究的语料库不能充分满足政策的需求,不足以证明其强制使用作为整个刑事司法系统所需的识别程序的合理性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号