Lineup Performance Research Articles

Modelling women’s team line-ups based on effectiveness and quality

ABSTRACT Understanding how different player rotations may impact team performance allows basketball coaches to select effective line-ups for specific tactical scenarios. The study aimed to i) assess how different line-ups or player combinations impact a team’s game performance; ii) explore the variations in line-up utilization among different national women’s basketball teams; and iii) examine how the offensive efficiency of each line-up evolves during the game. Data from 3,387 ball possessions in 23 international women’s basketball games were collected across four major competitions over six years. Offensive and defensive ratings, along with other features, were calculated. Then, a Markov chain model distinguished overperforming and underperforming line-ups of Chinese women’s basketball team, determining long-term probabilities for each rating level. The results indicated that i) the most dominant offensive line-up of the Chinese women’s basketball team, is PG-G-SF-PF-C, while G-G-F-PF-PF had the highest defensive rating; and ii) US and Australian women’s basketball teams favour using line-ups with three guards, while the Chinese women’s basketball team heavily relies on centre players. These results offer valuable insights for coaches regarding the performance of different line-ups in FIBA Female Basketball Competitions, optimizing line-up performance and aiding talent selection and recruitment at the international level.

Diagnosing eyewitness identifications with reaction time‑based Concealed Information Test: the effect of viewpoint congruency between test and encoding

Mistaken eyewitness identifications continue to be a major contributor to miscarriages of justice. Previous experiments have suggested that implicit identification procedures such as the Concealed Information Test (CIT) might be a promising alternative to classic lineups when encoding conditions during the crime were favorable. We tested this idea by manipulating view congruency (frontal vs. profile view) between encoding and test. Participants witnessed a videotaped mock theft that showed the thief and victim almost exclusively from frontal or profile view. At test, viewing angle was either congruent or incongruent with the view during encoding. We tested eyewitness identification with the RT-CIT (N = 74), and with a traditional simultaneous photo lineup (N = 97). The CIT showed strong capacity to diagnose face recognition (d = 0.91 [0.64; 1.18]), but unexpectedly, view congruency did not moderate this effect. View congruency moderated lineup performance for one of the two lineups. Following these unexpected findings, we conducted a replication with a stronger congruency manipulation and larger sample size. CIT (N = 156) showed moderate capacity to diagnose face recognition (d = 0.63 [0.46; 0.80]) and now view congruency did moderate the CIT effect. For lineups (N = 156), view congruency again moderated performance for one of the two lineups. Capacity for diagnosing face recognition was similar for lineups and RT-CIT in our first comparison, but much stronger for lineups in our second comparison. Future experiments might investigate more conditions that affect performance in lineups vs. the RT-CIT differentially.

Metamnemonic predictions of lineup identification

ABSTRACT After a crime is committed, investigators may query witnesses about whether they believe they will be to identify the perpetrator. However, we know little about how such metacognitive judgments are related to performance on a subsequent lineup identification task. The extant research has found the strength of this relationship to be small or nonexistent, which conflicts with the large body of literature indicating a moderate relationship between predictions and performance on memory tasks. In Studies 1–3, we induce variation in encoding quality by having participants watch a mock crime video with either low, medium, or high exposure quality, and then assess their future lineup performance. Calibration analysis revealed that assessments of future lineup performance were predictive of identification accuracy. This relationship was driven primarily by poor performance following low assessments. Studies 4 and 5 showed that these predictions are not based on a witness’s evaluation of their encoding experience, nor on a contemporaneous assessment of memory strength. These results reinforce the argument that variation in memory quality is needed to obtain reliable relationships between predictions and performance. An unexpected finding is that witnesses who made a prediction shortly after encoding evinced superior memory compared to those who made a prediction later.

Non-linear effects of stress on eyewitness memory

The effect of stress on face identification is not yet clear, with recent experiments finding positive, negative and null results. Here we report the results of two experiments examining the effect of stress on eyewitness performance in line-up face recognition tasks. Both experiments use a stress manipulation and live mock crime paradigm to examine the relationship between stress at encoding and subsequent line-up performance. Experiment 1 replicated an experiment by Sauerland et al. (Behav Sci Law. 2016;34(4):580–594) which induced stress using the Maastricht Acute Stress Test. The replication found the same null result as the original experiment. Experiment 2 aimed to address a limitation of many laboratory experiments which dichotomise stress into low and high groups for comparison. As the Yerkes-Dodson law (1908) suggests that a non-linear relationship exists between stress and performance, it was hypothesised that using a low, medium and high stress manipulation might show clearer results than a dichotomous paradigm. The results of Experiment 2 show a non-linear relationship, with no difference between the low and high stress groups but better performance by the middle stress group. The results suggest that a different approach is required in experiments on stress and face recognition, as the stress–performance relationship is likely non-linear. Significance: Non-linear models are better predictors of face recognition in line-up tasks than are linear models. Two group designs provide insufficient resolution to capture the stress–performance relationship.

The Impact of Procedure and Filler Similarity on Adolescent Eyewitness Lineup Performance

The Impact of Procedure and Filler Similarity on Adolescent Eyewitness Lineup Performance

Basketball lineup performance prediction using edge-centric multi-view network analysis

Sports analytics is one of the fast-growing applications of machine learning and data mining. The major goal in sport analytics applications is to make informed decisions to gain a competitive advantage. In this paper, we propose a method to analyse and predict lineup performance in basketball which may assist the team managers and coaches to make informed decisions. The constant lineup change in basketball games makes it vital to always have the best move ready at every moment of the game. A complex decision-making system is very important for the coaches to navigate their team through a season. This system must make the decisions based on the pros and cons of the teams, past results and lineups, and both teams’ performance under similar situations. To create this system, authors have constructed a signed, directed, and weighted network from the results of all matchups and lineups of the teams in NBA from 2007 to 2019. The proposed approach uses machine learning and graph theory to develop a new metric called Inverse Square Metric and edge-centric multi-view networks to predict the performance of a lineup in a given situation. The edge-centric approach provides a deep analysis of any condition between two teams from 16 different perspectives. The average accuracy achieved by ISM and edge-centric multi-view is 68% and 80%, respectively. In the end, the training and test datasets are chosen from different seasons and results are reasonable compared to the baseline methods.

Does exposure to facial composites damage eyewitness memory? A comprehensive review

SummaryEyewitnesses often create face likenesses, which are published in the hope that potential suspects will be reported to the police. Witnesses exposed to another witness's composite, however, may be positively or negatively influenced by such composites. A good likeness may facilitate identification, but a bad likeness that resembles an innocent suspect may lead to a misidentification (“mix‐up”). We offer a theoretical review, and comprehensively summarize extant studies descriptively because most studies did not report enough statistical details to warrant a formal meta‐analysis. Some studies showed negative exposure effects, particularly when the innocent suspect and composite shared misleading features. Studies that exposed witnesses to “good” composites reported positive or no effects on lineup performance, and some highly powered studies also showed no effect. We outline suggestions for further investigations under ecologically valid conditions. We also make recommendations for investigative practice, and the evaluation of identification evidence by fact finders or courts.

Identifying the guilty word: Simultaneous versus sequential lineups for DRM word lists.

Recent research in the eyewitness identification literature has investigated whether simultaneous or sequential lineups yield better discriminability. In standard eyewitness identification experiments, subjects view a mock-crime video and then are tested only once, requiring large samples for adequate power. However, there is no reason why theories of simultaneous versus sequential lineup performance cannot be tested using more traditional recognition memory tasks. In two experiments, subjects studied DRM (Deese-Roediger-McDermott) word lists (e.g., bed, rest, tired, ...) and were tested using "lineups" in which six words were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. A studied word (e.g., tired) served as the guilty suspect in target-present lineups, unstudied related words (e.g., nap) served as fillers in target-present and target-absent lineups, and critical lures (e.g., sleep) were included in some target-present and target-absent lineups as well, to serve as attractive alternatives to the target word (or suspect). ROC analyses showed that the simultaneous test format generally yielded superior discriminability performance compared to the sequential test format, whether or not the critical lure was present in the lineup.

Asking an eyewitness to predict their later lineup performance could harm the confidence–accuracy relationship

SummaryFew studies have investigated eyewitnesses' ability to predict their later lineup performance, known as predecision confidence. We applied calibration analysis in two experiments comparing predecision confidence (immediately after encoding but prior to a lineup) to postdecision confidence (immediately after a lineup) to determine which produces a superior relationship with lineup decision accuracy. Experiment 1 (N = 177) featured a multiple‐block lineup recognition paradigm featuring several targets and lineups; Experiment 2 featured an eyewitness identification paradigm with a mock‐crime video and a single lineup for each participant (N = 855). Across both experiments, postdecision confidence discriminated well between correct and incorrect lineup decisions, but predecision confidence was a poor predictor of accuracy. Moreover, simply asking for predecision confidence weakened the postdecision confidence–accuracy relationship. This implies that police should exercise caution when interviewing eyewitnesses, as they should not be asked to predict their ability to make an accurate lineup decision.

Developmental trends in lineup performance: Adolescents are more prone to innocent bystander misidentifications than children and adults.

We tested developmental trends in eyewitness identification in biased and unbiased lineups. Our main interest was adolescent's lineup performance compared with children and adults. 7-10-year-olds, 11-13-year-olds, 14-16-year-olds, and adults (N = 431) watched a wallet-theft-video and subsequently identified the thief, victim, and witness from simultaneous target-present and target-absent six-person photo lineups. The thief-absent lineup included a bystander previously seen in thief proximity. Research on unconscious transference suggested a selection bias toward the bystander in adults and 11-13-year-olds, but not in younger children. Confirming our hypothesis, adolescents were more prone to bystander bias than all other age groups. This may be due to adolescents making more inferential errors than children, as predicted by fuzzy-trace theory and associative-activation theory, combined with lower inhibition control in adolescents compared with adults. We also replicated a clothing bias for all age groups and age-related performance differences in our unbiased lineups. Consistent with previous findings, participants were generally overconfident in their decisions, even though confidence was a better predictor of accuracy in older compared with younger participants. With this study, we show that adolescents have an increased tendency to misidentify an innocent bystander. Continued efforts are needed to disentangle how adolescents in comparison to other age groups perform in forensically relevant situations.

Models of lineup memory

Face recognition memory is often tested by the police using a photo lineup, which consists of one suspect, who is either innocent or guilty, and five or more physically similar fillers, all of whom are known to be innocent. For many years, lineups were investigated in lab studies without guidance from standard models of recognition memory. More recently, signal detection theory has been used to conceptualize lineup memory and to motivate receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of lineup performance. Here, we describe three competing signal-detection models of lineup memory, derive their likelihood functions, and fit them to empirical ROC data. We also introduce the notion that memory signals generated by the faces in a lineup are likely to be correlated because, by design, those faces share features. The models we investigate differ in their predictions about the effect that correlated memory signals should have on the ability to discriminate innocent from guilty suspects. A popular compound signal detection model known as the Integration model predicts that correlated memory signals should impair discriminability. Empirically, this model performed so poorly that, going forward, it should probably be abandoned. The best-fitting model incorporates a principle known as “ensemble coding,” which predicts that correlated memory signals should enhance discriminability. The ensemble model aligns with a previously proposed theory of eyewitness identification according to which the simultaneous presentation of faces in a lineup enhances discriminability compared to when faces are presented in isolation because it permits eyewitnesses to detect and discount non-diagnostic facial features.

The impact of fillers on lineup performance

Filler siphoning theory posits that the presence of fillers (known innocents) in a lineup protects an innocent suspect from being chosen by siphoning choices away from that innocent suspect. This mechanism has been proposed as an explanation for why simultaneous lineups (viewing all lineup members at once) induces better performance than showups (one-person identification procedures). We implemented filler siphoning in a computational model (WITNESS, Clark, Applied Cognitive Psychology 17:629–654, 2003), and explored the impact of the number of fillers (lineup size) and filler quality on simultaneous and sequential lineups (viewing lineups members in sequence), and compared both to showups. In limited situations, we found that filler siphoning can produce a simultaneous lineup performance advantage, but one that is insufficient in magnitude to explain empirical data. However, the magnitude of the empirical simultaneous lineup advantage can be approximated once criterial variability is added to the model. But this modification works by negatively impacting showups rather than promoting more filler siphoning. In sequential lineups, fillers were found to harm performance. Filler siphoning fails to clarify the relationship between simultaneous lineups and sequential lineups or showups. By incorporating constructs like filler siphoning and criterial variability into a computational model, and trying to approximate empirical data, we can sort through explanations of eyewitness decision-making, a prerequisite for policy recommendations.

Receiver operating characteristic analysis of age-related changes in lineup performance

In the basic face memory literature, support has been found for the late maturation hypothesis, which holds that face recognition ability is not fully developed until at least adolescence. Support for the late maturation hypothesis in the criminal lineup identification literature, however, has been equivocal because of the analytic approach that has been used to examine age-related changes in identification performance. Recently, receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis was applied for the first time in the adult eyewitness memory literature to examine whether memory sensitivity differs across different types of lineup tests. ROC analysis allows for the separation of memory sensitivity from response bias in the analysis of recognition data. Here, we have made the first ROC-based comparison of adults’ and children’s (5- and 6-year-olds and 9- and 10-year-olds) memory performance on lineups by reanalyzing data from Humphries, Holliday, and Flowe (2012). In line with the late maturation hypothesis, memory sensitivity was significantly greater for adults compared with young children. Memory sensitivity for older children was similar to that for adults. The results indicate that the late maturation hypothesis can be generalized to account for age-related performance differences on an eyewitness memory task. The implications for developmental eyewitness memory research are discussed.

Effect of retention interval on showup and lineup performance

Showups – when a single suspect is presented to an eyewitness – are thought to be a more suggestive procedure than traditional lineups by the U.S. Supreme Court and social science researchers. The present experiment examined the impact of retention interval on showup identifications, because immediate showups might be no worse than, and perhaps even better than, a lineup conducted after a delay. Participants (N=1584) viewed a mock-crime video and then were presented with a showup or a simultaneous lineup, either immediately or a 48h delay. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed that a showup never resulted in better identification accuracy than a lineup. We conclude with a discussion of whether showups should ever be used.

Individual differences predict eyewitness identification performance

A great deal of research has focused on eyewitness identification performance as a function of sequential versus simultaneous lineup presentation methods. We examined if individual differences in cognitive ability influence eyewitness identification, and whether these factors lead to performance differences as a function of lineup presentation method. We found that individual differences in facial recognition ability, working memory capacity, and levels of autistic traits, did result in differential performance. Differences in lineup performance are due to the interaction of individual differences and presentation method, signaling that it is possible to enhance the accuracy of eyewitness identifications by tailoring a lineup presentation method to the capabilities of an individual eyewitness.

Exploring the effects of age and delay on children's person identifications: Verbal descriptions, lineup performance, and the influence of wildcards

We explored the effects of age and retention interval on several measures of children's person identification ability: verbal descriptions, lineup performance, and the success of a 'wildcard'--a photo of a silhouetted figure with a large question mark superimposed--in reducing children's tendency to choose from target-absent lineups. Children aged 5-7 years (N= 101) and 8-11 years (N= 109) were briefly exposed to an experimental confederate during a staged event. Either 1-2 days or 2 weeks later, children described the confederate and were then presented with either a target-present or -absent lineup. Within each group, approximately half of the children were presented with a wildcard and half were not. Target-present lineup performance improved as age increased. Compared to control children, children in the wildcard condition were more likely to correctly reject the target-absent lineup, and less likely to identify the innocent suspect. The wildcard did not influence children's target-present lineup accuracy, nor did delay exert an influence on any of our measures of lineup performance. These findings extend our knowledge of children's person identifications, as well as providing further support for the use of wildcards in photographic lineups.

A comparison of presentation methods of video identification parades

Researchers have demonstrated that sequential lineup presentation reduces false identifications from perpetrator absent lineups. In England and Wales police identification parades are shown on video in a sequential manner. However, police sequential presentation varies from the strict sequential presentation advocated by researchers. In addition, after police have shown the sequential presentation they also have the option to show witnesses a matrix of the parade where witnesses can see all members of the parade simultaneously. The research reported investigated the effect of strict sequential presentation, police sequential presentation and police sequential presentation plus matrix on mock witnesses' performance on perpetrator present and absent video identification parades. Strict sequential presentation led to fewer correct identifications of the perpetrator than police sequential and police sequential plus matrix, with no difference in performance between either of the police conditions. For perpetrator absent lineups there was no effect of lineup presentation condition on lineup performance. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Novel lineup methods for improving the performance of older eyewitnesses

AbstractPrevious research shows that older witnesses demonstrate poorer lineup performance compared to younger adults. Two experiments are presented which investigated the effectiveness of pre‐identification procedures aimed to reduce false identifications made by older adults. In experiment one older adults' demonstrated poorer lineup performance compared to younger adults. However, older adults benefited from pre‐lineup questions and a practice lineup prior to viewing a target absent (TA) lineup. In a second experiment, participants in the practice lineup condition made significantly fewer false identifications and more correct rejections on two TA lineups compared to participants in the control condition. On both target present (TP) lineups there was no significant difference in lineup performance between the two conditions. The effect of pre‐identification procedure on self‐reported lineup decision strategy and memory for non‐biased lineup instructions are discussed, as well as future research directions. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Don't it make my brown eyes blue: Co-witness misinformation about a target's appearance can impair target-absent line-up performance

Misinformation from another witness has been shown to impair eyewitness reports, but little is known about how it may influence eyewitness identification. In Experiment 1, adult pairs comprising one participant and one experimental confederate viewed a video clip of a staged theft. Half of the participants were then misinformed by the confederate that the thief's accomplice had blue eyes (in fact, they were brown). Next, individual participants described the accomplice and completed a target-absent photographic line-up task comprising blue-eyed members. Misinformed participants were several times more likely than controls to describe the accomplice as having blue eyes, and twice as likely to identify someone from the line-up. In Experiment 2, when line-up members’ eye colour was digitally altered from blue to brown, the line-up effect disappeared, suggesting that the increase in identifications in Experiment 1 was not a generalised increase in willingness to choose from the line-up. In Experiment 3, we discounted the possibility that discussion alone could account for the line-up misinformation effect, by subjecting all participants to co-witness discussion.

The wildcard: A simple technique for improving children's target‐absent lineup performance

AbstractWe attempted to increase children's willingness to reject target‐absent lineups by making identification and rejection response procedures highly comparable. Eight‐ to eleven‐year‐old children (N = 159) were briefly exposed to a confederate in the context of a staged event, and 24–48 hours later completed either a target‐present or target‐absent photographic lineup task. Within each lineup condition, children were either told to tell the experimenter if the target was not present (control condition), or provided with an additional photograph of a silhouetted figure with a large question mark superimposed (wildcard condition), and asked to point to this photograph if the target was not present. The wildcard increased children's accuracy on the target‐absent lineup without affecting their target‐present performance. In fact, performance was increased to a point at which target‐absent and target‐present accuracy did not differ significantly. These findings offer a promising, easily‐implemented intervention for reducing children's eyewitness identification errors. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.