Objective: Feedback from lineup administrators about identification accuracy significantly impacts witness confidence. In the current studies, we investigated the effect of post-identification feedback given 1-week after an initial, pristine lineup. We tested 2 kinds of feedback: typical feedback (i.e., about identification accuracy) and misinformation feedback. Misinformation feedback came in the form of suggestive questioning that falsely suggested the participant was either more or less confident in their initial identification than they actually reported. Hypotheses: We hypothesized both confirming misinformation and typical feedback would significantly inflate witness confidence relative to no feedback controls while disconfirming misinformation and typical feedback would deflate witness confidence relative to controls. Method: Across 2 studies, participants (N = 907), recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk, watched a mock crime video, made an identification, and reported their confidence under unbiased lineup conditions. One week later, they received either confirming or disconfirming misinformation or typical feedback. They then provided a retrospective confidence judgment. Results: Misinformation feedback caused significant confidence change. Participants given false feedback that they were more confident in their initial identification than they reported later recalled greater initial confidence. Even when pristine identification conditions were used, typical confirming feedback caused participants to later remember greater confidence than they initially reported at the time of the lineup. Even in the absence of any feedback, control participants showed significant confidence inflation over time. Conclusion: These results highlight the need for lineup administrators to both ask for and document verbatim witness confidence at the time of the initial identification. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

目击者的信心可塑性：错误信息作为识别后的反馈。

目标：阵容管理员关于身份识别准确性的反馈会显着影响证人的信心。在当前的研究中，我们调查了原始原始阵容后1周给予识别后反馈的效果。我们测试了两种反馈：典型反馈（即关于识别准确性）和错误信息反馈。错误信息反馈以提示性询问的形式出现，该询问错误地暗示参与者对自己的最初身份比实际报告的信心或多或少。假设：我们假设确认错误信息和典型反馈会显着提高证人的信心（相对于无反馈控制），而对错误信息和典型反馈则会使证人相对于控件的信心大打折扣。方法：在2项研究中，通过Amazon Mechanical Turk招募的参与者（N = 907）观看了模拟犯罪视频，进行了身份识别并报告了他们在无偏见的阵容条件下的信心。一周后，他们收到了确认或否定错误信息或典型反馈的信息。然后，他们提供了回顾性信心判断。结果：错误信息反馈导致重大的置信度变化。参与者提供了错误的反馈，即他们对最初的识别更有信心，而不是后来报告称他们对最初的识别更有信心。即使使用原始的识别条件，典型的确认反馈也会导致参与者后来记忆起来比他们在阵容开始时报告的更大的信心。即使没有反馈，对照组参与者随着时间的推移显示出显着的信心膨胀。结论：这些结果突出表明，阵容管理员需要在初次鉴定时同时要求和记录逐字见证人的信心。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。