ABSTRACT

Wixted et al. (in press. Doing right by the eyewitness evidence: A response to Berkowitz et al. Memory) remind us that they are aware of some conditions in which confidence does not trump all but suggest that initial high-confidence errors should be rare. In this reply, we draw attention to new lab research that continues to cast doubt on the value of an initial eyewitness identification made with high confidence. Additional data from field studies of police lineups lead us to conclude that it is far too risky in real-world cases to assume that eyewitnesses who have high initial confidence are also highly accurate. As a final point, we dispute Wixted et al.’s interpretation of “initial low confidence” in the DNA exoneration cases.

摘要

威克斯特等人。（在新闻中。根据目击者的证据做正确的事：对 Berkowitz 等人的回应。记忆）提醒我们，他们知道在某些情况下，信心并不胜过一切，但表明最初的高信心错误应该很少见。在此答复中，我们提请注意新的实验室研究，该研究继续对以高置信度进行的初步目击者身份识别的价值提出质疑。来自警察阵容现场研究的其他数据使我们得出结论，在现实世界的案例中，假设具有高度初始信心的目击者也高度准确是太冒险了。最后一点，我们对 Wixted 等人对 DNA 无罪案件中“初始低置信度”的解释提出异议。