Once again: selecting foils as similar to the suspect, or matching the description of the culprit?
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine Clark et al.’s (2013) claim that, contrary to the white paper produced by the American Psychological Association (Wells et al., 1998), the match-to-description method of choosing foils is inferior to the similarity-to-suspect method.
Design/methodology/approach
Examining the existing empirical evidence.
Findings
There is no difference between the two methods in rate of identifications. Sometimes, however, the rate of false identifications is larger when the similarity-to-suspect method is used.
Practical implications
The white paper’s recommendation should remain in place.
Originality/value
Keeping the white paper’s recommendation is important to prevent false identifications.
Keywords
Citation
Levi, A. (2016), "Once again: selecting foils as similar to the suspect, or matching the description of the culprit?", Journal of Criminal Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 114-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-03-2016-0011
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2016, Emerald Group Publishing Limited