 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The contents of the Sequential lineups page were merged into Police lineup on 22 May 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 September 2019 and 18 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meadair.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 02:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 2 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mackenziecole53. Peer reviewers: Brynneosh, HalleBieber.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 06:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The emphasis in the introduction on the crucial information for eyewitnesses is a great addition. It is important and rightfully belongs in the introduction, and it also brief enough so as not to overwhelm the reader. I might also recommend adding a note to the last paragraph there ("For evidence from a lineup to be admissible...") on the relevant jurisdictions and regional legal differences regarding this policy.
The additions on alternatives are strong and succinct, tying in evidence supporting police lineups as a more accurate method of identification.
I propose that the "Limitations of technology" be renamed to "limitations of lineups" to better capture the meaning of the section. Jangofett27 (talk) 22:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You did a great job, especially adding additional information that was left out.Brynneosh (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your addition of DNA evidence under lineup errors was a great change. You could also add some history of the use of DNA evidence and if it is preferred now over police lineups because of its accuracy(HalleBieber (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)).[reply]
In the Studies section, I see that that the last line currently reads:
"Mistaken rate in target-absent condition: 19% for sequential lineups and 39% for sequential lineups"
Is that line perhaps supposed to read like this?
"Mistaken rate in target-absent condition: 19% for sequential lineups and 39% for simultaneous lineups"
Studies
Cutler and Penrod (1988)
Brain L. Cutler and Steven D. Penrod conducted this study in 1988 to examine multiple variables' influence on eyewitnesses' accuracy during a lineup. The participants were first given a videotaped store robbery and a questionnaire, then asked to identify the robber in a photo lineup. They were given different videotapes, different lineups, and different instructions. There were 175 participants, all undergraduate college students.
The results were:
Correct identification rate: 80% for sequential lineups and 76% for simultaneous lineups (total).
78% for sequential lineups and 80% for simultaneous lineups when cues were strong.
84% for sequential lineups and 58% for simultaneous lineups when cues were weak.
Mistaken rate in target-absent condition: 19% for sequential lineups and 39% for sequential lineups.
Thanks for checking this. Invertzoo (talk) 17:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
