OBJECTIVE This field-simulation experiment was designed to compare eyewitness performance when conducting show ups and lineups under field versus laboratory conditions. HYPOTHESES We expected to replicate the findings from previous field-simulation experiments showing overconfidence in show up identifications made under field but not lab conditions, and further predicted that under field conditions, high-confidence identifications are more likely to be correct when using lineups compared with show ups. It was also expected that field conditions would lead witnesses to lower their criterion for choosing with show ups, but we did not know how field conditions would affect lineup decision-making. METHOD Participants (N = 719) witnessed the theft of a laptop computer and were asked to identify a suspect from a live show up, a photographic show up, or a photographic lineup administered under either field or lab conditions. In the field condition, uniformed officers functioned as experimenters and participants were immersed in what they were led to believe was an actual police investigation. In the lab condition, participants were debriefed before the identification procedure that the theft was staged for research purposes and that their identifications were being made as part of a study on eyewitness memory. RESULTS As predicted, witnesses were overconfident in their show up identifications made under field but not lab conditions, and high-confidence identifications were more likely to be correct when using lineups compared with show ups. Also as expected, field conditions led witnesses to lower their criterion for choosing with show ups regardless of culprit presence. However, the opposite was true for lineups, such that field conditions resulted in witnesses raising their criterion for choosing. CONCLUSIONS Field conditions had a very different effect on witness performance when conducting show ups compared with lineups. When witnesses were led to believe that their identification would result in the arrest and prosecution of the suspect, they became more liberal in their decision-making when show ups were used but more conservative when lineups were employed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

比较现场与实验室的目击者表现：现实世界的条件如何影响目击者的决策。

目的 该现场模拟实验旨在比较目击者在现场与实验室条件下进行表演和排队时的表现。假设我们希望复制之前现场模拟实验的结果，显示对在现场而非实验室条件下进行的显示识别过度自信，并进一步预测，在现场条件下，与使用阵容相比，高置信度识别更有可能是正确的。出现。人们还预计现场条件会导致证人降低选择出场的标准，但我们不知道现场条件会如何影响阵容决策。方法 参与者 (N = 719) 目击了笔记本电脑被盗事件，并被要求从现场或实验室条件下的现场表演、摄影表演或摄影阵容中识别嫌疑人。在现场条件下，身穿制服的警察充当实验者，参与者沉浸在他们被引导相信的真正的警方调查中。在实验室条件下，参与者在身份识别程序之前被告知，盗窃事件是为了研究目的而进行的，他们的身份识别是作为目击者记忆研究的一部分。结果 正如预测的那样，目击者对他们在现场而不是实验室条件下进行的出庭鉴定过于自信，并且与出庭相比，使用阵容进行的高置信度鉴定更有可能是正确的。同样正如预期的那样，现场条件导致目击者降低了选择出庭的标准，无论罪犯是否存在。但阵容的情况却恰恰相反，场上的情况导致证人提高了选择标准。结论 与阵容相比，现场条件对证人表现的影响截然不同。当证人被引导相信他们的身份识别将导致对嫌疑人的逮捕和起诉时，当使用出庭时，他们的决策会变得更加自由，而当使用排队时，他们的决策会变得更加保守。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。