¿Son fiables las ruedas de reconocimiento como prueba de identificación del autor de un delito? Una revisión de meta-análisis y estudios experimentales
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47741/17943108.516Palabras clave:
Identificación de sospechosos, testigo, investigación criminal, policía, Rueda de reconocimientoResumen
La rueda de reconocimiento es una diligencia de investigación policial orientada a identificar al autor de un crimen. Se trata de una práctica relativamente frecuente que puede tener como resultado consolidar sospechas o también descartar líneas de investigación. La rueda de reconocimiento suele estar precedida de la exposición de un álbum de fotos y también es frecuente solicitar al mismo testigo que haga una descripción o un retrato robot del atacante. Existen fundadas sospechas de que la concatenación de estas diligencias policiales de identificación desvirtúa la eficacia de la declaración del testigo presencial para elegir al verdadero culpable, en caso de que esté presente en la rueda. También existen algunas controversias con respecto a la fiabilidad de la rueda de reconocimiento en función de la edad del testigo, del número de personas que la conforman, del procedimiento para llevarla a cabo, entre otras. Con el objetivo de acotar la evidencia empírica en torno a estas cuestiones, se presenta una revisión de estudios meta-analíticos y diversos estudios experimentales, desde los cuales se han podido identificar los procedimientos más adecuados para optimizar la eficacia en la precisión de la declaración de los testigos presenciales de un delito en el contexto de una rueda de reconocimiento.
Descargas
Citas
Akan, M., Robinson, M. M., Mickes, L., Wixted, J. T. y Benjamín, A. S. (2020). The effect of lineup size on eyewitness identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(2), 369-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xap0000340
Amendola, K. L. y Wixted, J. T. (2015). Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of suspect identifications made by actual eyewitnesses from simultaneous and sequential lineups in a randomized field trial. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 263-284.
Amendola, K. L. y Wixted, J. T. (2017). The role of site variance in the American Judicature Society field study comparing simultaneous and sequential lineups. Journal Quantitative Criminology, 33, 1-19.
Bergold, A. (2022). Optimal eyewitness lineups: A review and future directions. In Bornstein, B. H., Miller, M. K. and DeMatteo, D. (eds.). Advances in psychology and law, 6. Springer.
Brewer, N., Weber, N. y Guerin, N. (2020). Police lineups of the future? American Psychologist, 75(1), 76-91.
Brewer, N. y Doyle, J. (2021). Changing the face of police lineups: Delivering more information from witnesses. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 10(2), 180-195.
Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Greenwood, K., Hancock, J. B., Burton, M. y Miller, P. (1999). Verification of faces identities from images captured on video. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 5(4), 339-360.
Bruer, K., Harvey, M., Adams, A. y Price, H. (2017). Judicial discussion of eyewitness identification evidence. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 49, 209-220.
Carlson, C. A., Gronlund, S. D., y Clark, S. E. (2008). Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(2), 118–128.
Carlson, C. A. y Carlson, M. A. (2014). An evaluation of perpetrator distinctiveness, weapon presence, and lineup presentation using ROC analysis. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 45-53.
Charman, S. D. y Wells, G. L. (2007). Is the appearance change instruction a good idea? Law and Human Behavior, 31, 3-22.
Charman, S., Matuku, K. y Mook, A. (2019). Non-blind lineup administration biases administrators’ interpretations of ambiguous witness statements and their perceptions of the witness. Applied Cognitive Psycology, 33, 1260-1270.
Chung, C. F. y Hayward, W. G. (2010). Identification accuracy and confidence reliability in crossracial lineup identification. The 6th Asia-Pacific
Conference on Vision (APCV 2010), Taipei, Taiwan, 23-26 July 2010.
Clark, S. E. y Godfrey, R. D. (2009). Eyewitness identification evidenceand innocence risk. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 22-42.
Colloff, M. F. y Wixted, J. T. (2020). Why are lineups better than showups? A test of the filler siphoning and enhanced discriminability accounts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 26(1), 124-143.
Colloff, M. F., Wilson, B. M., Seale-Carlise, T. y Wixted, J. T. (2021). Optimizing the selection of fillers in pólice linesup. Psychological y Cognitive Sciences, 118(8), 1-5.
Davis, J. P., Maigut, A. C., Jolliffe, D., Gibson, S. J. y Solomon, C. J. (2015). Holistic facial composite creation and subsequent video line-up eyewitness identification paradigm. Journal of Visualized Experiments: JoVE, 106.
Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., Penrod, S. D. y McGorty, E. K. (2004). A meta-analytic review of the effects of high stress on eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 28(6), 687-706.
Deffenbacher, K., Bornstein, B. y Penrod, S. (2006). Mugshot exposure effects: Retroactive interference, mugshot commitment, source confusion, and unconscious transference. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 287-307.
Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hammond, R. y Dupuis, P. (2001). Mug shot exposure prior to lineup identification: Interference, transference and
commitment effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1280-1284.
Erickson, W., Lampinen, J. y Moore, K. (2015). Eyewitness identifications by older and younger adults: A meta-analysis and discussion. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 31, 108-121.
Finley, J. R., Roediger, H. L., Hughes, A., Wahlheim, C. y Jacoby, L. (2015). Simultaneous versus sequential presentation in testing recognition memory for faces. American Journal of Psychology, 128(2), 173-195.
Finley, J. R., Wixted, J. T. y Roediger, H. L. (2020). Identifying the guilty word: Simultaneous versus sequential lineups for DRM word lists. Memory & Cognition, 48, 903-919.
Fitzgerald, R. J. y Price, H. L. (2015). Eyewitness identification across the lifespan: A metaanalysis of age differences. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1228-1265.
González, J. L. y Manzanero, A. (2018). Obtención y valoración del testimonio. Pirámide.
Gronlund, S. D., Carlson, C. A., Neuschatz, J. S., Goodsell, C. A., Wetmore, S. A., Wooten, A. y Graham, M. (2012). Showups versus lineups: An evaluation using ROC analysis. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 221-228.
Gronlund, S. D., Wixted, J. T. y Mickes, L. (2014). Evaluating eyewitness identification procedures usingreceiver operating characteristic analysis.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(1), 3-10.
Juncu, S. y Fitzgerald, R. J. (2021). A meta-analysis of lineup size effects on eyewitness identification. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 27(3), 295-315.
Kaesler, M. , Dunn, J . C . , Ransom, K . et al. (2020). Do sequential lineups impair underlying discriminability? Cognitive Research, 5, 35, 5-21.
Kassin, S. M., Tubb, V. A., Hosch, H. M. y Memon, A. (2001). On the “general acceptance” of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
Lin, W., Strube, M. J. y Roediger, H. L. (2019). The effects of repeated lineups and delay on eyewitness identification. Cognitive Research, 4(16).
Lindsay, R. C. L. y Wells, G. L. (1985). Improvingeyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneousversus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
Lucas, C., Brewer, N., Michael, Z. y Foster, T. (2020). The effects of explicit “Not Present” and “Don’t Know” response options on identification decisions in computer-administered lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 1495-1509.
Martín, C. (2015). Reconocimiento del delincuente: nuevas diligencias de investigación. Boletín del Ministerio de Justicia, No. 2182. Gobierno de España.
Maswood, R. y Rajaram, S. (2019). Social transmission of flase memory in small groups and large networks. Topics in Cognitive Science, 11, 687-709.
Meisters, J., Diedenhofen, B. y Musch, J. (2018). Eyewitness identification in simultaneous and sequential lineups: An investigation of position effects using receiver operating characteristics. Memory, 26(9), 1297-1309.
Moody, S. A., Cabell, J. J., Livingston, T. N. y Yang, Y. (2023). Evidence-based suspicion and the prior probability of guilt in police interrogations. Law and Human Behavior, 47(2), 307-319.
Quigley-McBride, A. y Wells, G. L. (2023). Eyewitness confidence and decision time reflect identification accuracy in actual police lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 47(2), 333-347.
Semmler, C. A., Kaesler, M., Dunn, J. y Ransom, K. (2020). Do sequential lineups impair underlying discriminability? Cognitive Research: Principles
and Implications, 5(1), 1-21.
Steblay, N. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21(3), 283-297.
Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S. y Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 459-473.
Steblay, N., Dysart, J. y Wells, G. L. (2011). Seventy-two tests of the sequential lineup superiority effect: A meta-analysis and policy discussion. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 99-139.
Steblay, N. y Dysart, J. (2016). Repeated eyewitness identification procedures with the same suspect. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and
Cognition, 5(3), 284-289.
Wells, G. L. (1984). The psychology of lineupidentifications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14(2), 89-179.
Wells, G. L., Kovera, M. B., Douglass, A. B., Brewer, N., Meissner, C. A. y Wixted, J. T. (2020). Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 44(1), 3-36.
Wells, G. L., Steblay, N. K. y Dysart, J. E. (2011). A test of the simultaneous vs. sequential lineup methods. Des Moines, IA: American Judicature Society.
Wells, G. L., Steblay, N. K. y Dysart, J. E. (2015). Doubleblind photo lineups using actual eyewitnesses: Anexperimental test of a sequential versus
simultaneous lineup procedure. Law and Human Behavior, 39(1), 1-14.
Willmott, D. y Sherretts, N. (2016). Individual differences in eyewitness identification accuracy between sequential and simultaneous line-ups: Consequences for police practice and jury decisions. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 4(4), 228-239.
Wixted, J. T., Mickes, L., Dunn, J. C., Clark, S. E. y Wells, W. (2015). Estimating the reliability of eyewitness identificationsfrom police lineups. Psycological & Cognitive Sciences, 113(2), 304-309.
Wixted, J. T., Mickes, L. y Fisher, R. P. (2018). Rethinking the reliability of eyewitness memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(3), 324-335.
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2023 Revista Criminalidad
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Licencia creative commons CC BY NC ND https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
