As rodas de reconhecimento são confiáveis como prova de identificação do autor do crime? Uma revisão de metanálises e estudos experimentais
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47741/17943108.516Palavras-chave:
Identificação de suspeitos, testemunha, investigação criminal, polícia, FormaçãoResumo
A roda de reconhecimento é um procedimento de investigação policial que visa identificar o autor de um crime. É uma prática relativamente comum que pode resultar na consolidação de suspeitas ou na exclusão de linhas de investigação. A roda de identificação é geralmente precedida pela exibição de um álbum de fotos e é comum pedir à mesma testemunha que faça uma descrição ou um esboço do autor do crime. Há fortes suspeitas de que a concatenação dessas etapas de identificação policial prejudica a eficácia do depoimento da testemunha ocular na identificação do verdadeiro culpado, se presente nessa fase. Há também alguma controvérsia quanto à confiabilidade da roda de reconhecimento, dependendo da idade da testemunha, do número de pessoas envolvidas, do procedimento para realizá-la, entre outros. A fim de restringir as evidências empíricas sobre essas questões, é apresentada uma revisão de estudos metanalíticos e experimentais, a partir dos quais foi possível identificar os procedimentos mais adequados para otimizar a eficácia na precisão do depoimento de testemunhas oculares no contexto de uma roda de reconhecimento.
Downloads
Referências
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
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Criminalidad
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Licencia creative commons CC BY NC ND https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
