Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Filler siphoning theory does not predict the effect of lineup fairness on the ability to discriminate innocent from guilty suspects : reply to Smith, Wells, Smalarz, and Lampinen

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Colloff, M. F., Wade, Kimberley A. , Strange, D. and Wixted, J. T. (2018) Filler siphoning theory does not predict the effect of lineup fairness on the ability to discriminate innocent from guilty suspects : reply to Smith, Wells, Smalarz, and Lampinen. Psychological Science, 29 (9). pp. 1552-1557. ISSN 0956-7976.

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP-filler-siphoning-theory-predict-fairness-innocent-guilty-Wade-2018.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer.

Download (1108Kb) | Preview

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Smith, Wells, Smalarz, and Lampinen (2017) claim that we (Colloff, Wade, & Strange, 2016) were wrong to conclude that fair lineups enhanced people’s ability to discriminate between innocent and guilty suspects compared to unfair lineups. They argue our results reflect differential-filler-siphoning, not diagnostic-feature-detection. But a manipulation that decreases identifications of innocent suspects more than guilty suspects (i.e., that increases filler-siphoning or conservative responding) does not necessarily increase people’s ability to discriminate between innocent and guilty suspects. Unlike diagnostic-feature-detection, fillersiphoning does not make a prediction about people’s ability to discriminate between innocent and guilty suspects. Moreover, we replicated Colloff et al.’s results in the absence of fillersiphoning (N=2,078). Finally, a model is needed to measure ability to discriminate between innocent and guilty suspects. Smith et al.’s model-based analysis contained several errors. Correcting those errors shows that our model was not faulty, and Smith et al.’s model supports our original conclusions.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Divisions: Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Science > Psychology
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): Signal detection (Psychology), Eyewitness identification, Recognition (Psychology)
Journal or Publication Title: Psychological Science
Publisher: Sage Publications Ltd.
ISSN: 0956-7976
Official Date: 1 September 2018
Dates:
DateEvent
1 September 2018Published
3 August 2018Available
17 May 2018Accepted
Volume: 29
Number: 9
Page Range: pp. 1552-1557
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Restricted or Subscription Access
Date of first compliant deposit: 18 May 2018
Date of first compliant Open Access: 21 May 2018
Related URLs:
  • Publisher

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us