Police lineups are widely used despite evidence that eyewitnesses frequently err by failing to identify the culprit or mistakenly identifying innocent suspects or lineup fillers. We examine how police investigators, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges interpret the information witnesses provide when confronted with a traditional lineup and describe one alternative procedure that departs significantly from current practice. This alternative abandons the categorical witness decision, replacing it with confidence judgments about each lineup member’s match to memory for the culprit. Compared with the traditional lineup, this approach provides more nuanced information about suspect guilt. We challenge criminal justice researchers and professionals to examine the potential informational gains this approach offers—and to explore other genuine alternatives—rather than merely tinkering with the existing approach. Finally, we emphasize that a truly collaborative engagement with justice system professionals will be more productive than researchers being the sole arbiters of model practices.

尽管有证据表明目击者经常因未能确定罪魁祸首或错误地确定无辜嫌疑人或阵容填充物而犯错，但警察阵容仍被广泛使用。我们研究了警察调查员、检察官、辩护律师和法官在面对传统阵容时如何解释证人提供的信息，并描述了一种与当前做法大相径庭的替代程序。这种替代方案放弃了明确的证人决定，取而代之的是对每个阵容成员与罪犯记忆相匹配的信心判断。与传统的阵容相比，这种方法提供了关于嫌疑犯有罪的更细微的信息。我们要求刑事司法研究人员和专业人士检查这种方法提供的潜在信息收益 - 并探索其他真正的替代方案 - 而不仅仅是修补现有方法。最后，我们强调，与作为示范实践的唯一仲裁者的研究人员相比，与司法系统专业人员的真正协作参与将更有成效。