Objective: Past research with one-person showup identification procedures suggests that providing witnesses with an explicit option to opt-out reduces innocent-suspect identifications without reducing culprit identifications (Weber & Perfect, 2012). This finding suggests that improving performance from identification procedures might be as simple as providing witnesses with the option to opt-out from deciding. We examined whether providing witnesses with an option to say "not sure" improved performance from showup procedures. Hypotheses: We predicted that participants would opt-out more when given a poor view. We also predicted that classification performance would be better for those who had option to opt-out, and this improvement would be more pronounced for those who had a poor view. Finally, we predicted that the opt-out option would reduce more low-confidence than high-confidence decisions. Method: We randomly assigned Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers (Experiment 1A: N = 2,003, average age = 36.90 [SD = 11.67], 57.86% female) and university students (Experiment 1B: N = 721, average age = 19.91 (SD = 3.99), 69.72% female) to a 2 (culprit: present, absent) × 2 (memory strength: strong, weak) × 2 (not sure option: yes, no) between-participants design. We manipulated memory strength by giving witnesses either a clear or degraded view of the encoding video. After watching the encoding video, participants completed a 10-min filler task and were then presented with a showup procedure. Results: Participants who were given a poor view were more likely to opt-out than were participants who were given a clear view. Participants who were given the option to respond not sure reported higher confidence in their decisions. However, the not sure option did not improve classification performance. Conclusion: Contrary to our prediction, we found no evidence that an opt-out option improves performance from a showup procedure, which is consistent with past research examining opt-out options with lineup procedures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

为证人提供一个选项，让他们说“我不确定”，这既不会提高分类性能，也不会提高可疑身份的可靠性。

目的：过去对单人出场识别程序的研究表明，为证人提供明确的选择退出的选择，可以减少无辜嫌疑人的身份，而不会减少罪魁祸首的身份（Weber＆Perfect，2012）。这一发现表明，通过身份查验程序提高绩效可能与为证人提供选择退出决定的决定一样简单。我们检查了是否可以为证人提供选择，以便说出“不确定”是否可以改善出庭程序的表现。假设：我们预计，如果视野不佳，参与者会选择退出。我们还预测，对于那些选择退出的人来说，分类性能会更好，而对于视力较差的人来说，这种改进会更加明显。最后，我们预测，选择退出选项会比高信心决策减少更多的低信心决策。方法：我们随机分配了Amazon Mechanical Turk工人（实验1A：N = 2,003，平均年龄= 36.90 [SD = 11.67]，女性为57.86％，女性）和大学生（实验1B：N = 721，平均年龄= 19.91（SD = 3.99） ），69.72％的女性）到参与者之间设计2（罪犯：现在，缺席）×2（记忆强度：强，弱）×2（不确定选项：是，否）。我们通过给目击者清晰的或退化的编码视频视图来操纵记忆力。观看编码视频后，参与者完成了10分钟的填充任务，然后接受了演示程序。结果：视野较差的参与者比视野清晰的参与者更有可能选择退出。可以做出回应的参与者不确定，他们对自己的决定有较高的信心。但是，不确定选项不能提高分类性能。结论：与我们的预测相反，我们没有发现选择退出选项可以改善表演程序的性能的证据，这与以往研究了使用选择程序进行选择退出选项的研究一致。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。