Forensic Psychology Test #1 Review PDF

Bratovz 1 Forensic Psychology Test #1 Review Definitions of Forensic Psychology -​ Two basic ways of defining forensic psychology: 1.​ Narrow definition: -​ A field of psychology that includes: -​ Clinical practices in forensic psychology:...

Bratovz 1 Forensic Psychology Test #1 Review Definitions of Forensic Psychology -​ Two basic ways of defining forensic psychology: 1.​ Narrow definition: -​ A field of psychology that includes: -​ Clinical practices in forensic psychology: -​ Assessment -​ Consultation -​ Treatment -​ (Excludes psychologists who primarily conduct forensic research) 2.​ Broad definition -​ A research endeavor and/or professional practice that examines: -​ Human behaviour in relation to the legal system -​ Includes application and research -​ Includes areas such as social, cognitive, personality, organizational and developmental psychology -​ [ Test Question: which wouldn’t fit in a narrow definition… Research ] History of Forensic Psychology Early Research: -​ Cattell (1895): -​ Accuracy of everyday observations -​ (found most students were incorrect when asked a remembrance question) -​ Binet (1900): -​ Suggestibility in children -​ (Created the intelligent tests for children) -​ Stern (1910): -​ Eyewitness and arousal -​ (when distressed, leads to false memory) Early Court Cases in Europe: -​ Von Schrenck Notzing (1896): German Doctor -​ Pre trial press can result in retroactive memory falsification - confuse actual memory with what they read/ or saw  Bratovz 2 -​ Varendonck (1911) -​ Children can provide inaccurate testimony due to suggestive questioning techniques History of forensic Psychology -​ On the witness stand by Munsterberg (1908): (wrote about false confessions) -​ Discusses role of psychology in the legal system -​ State v. Driver (1921) -​ 1st case in the U.S. where expert testimony is provided by a psychologist -​ Brown v. Board of Education (1954) -​ U.S. school segregation -​ Jenkins v. United States (1962) -​ Psychologists’ qualifications -​ Jenkins had schizophrenia -​ In Canada: -​ Similar contributions to eyewitness testimony and jury decision making -​ Research and advances in corrections -​ Canadian courts slower to recognize psychologists Psychologists in Court -​ Functions of an expert witness -​ Aid in understanding a particular issue relevant to the case -​ Provide an opinion - only expert witness can provide an opinion (where they are diff) -​ (as opposed to a regular witnesses) -​ Challenges of providing expert testimony Admissibility Criteria -​ Frye v. United States (1923) -​ Resulted in the general acceptance test: -​ For novel scientific evidence to be admissible procedures are generally accepted in scientific community -​ Polygraph test.. Should results be accepted? -​ Daubert v. Merrell Dow, Inc. (1993) - born with serious birth defects, sue for drugs given that may have caused the defects -​ Testimony is admissible if it is: 1.​ Provided by an expert 2.​ Relevant and 3.​ Valid, where validity is determined by the Daubert criteria -​ The Daubert criteria requires that research: -​ Be peer reviewed -​ Be testable (falsifiable through experimentation) -​ Have a known error rate -​ Adhere to professional standards  Bratovz 3 -​ R v. Mohan (1994) -​ In addition to requiring that testimony be reliable, Mohan criteria in Canada states that testimony: -​ Must be relevant -​ Must assist the trier of fact -​ Must not violate any rules of exclusion -​ Must be provided by a qualified expert -​ Most be provided by a qualified expert Further Note: -​ Criteria applies to all expert witnesses, but just psychologists Police Psychology Police Selection -​ Process by which police agencies select police officers -​ Can screen out those with undesirable qualities or select in those with desirable qualities -​ Who do we want to screen out? -​ Examples: -​ Psychopathy -​ Criminal records -​ Those who are reliable -​ Stable, no anger -​ Biased opinions -​ Applicants usually assessed for: -​ Physical fitness, cognitive abilities, personality and job-related abilities -​ Ex. O.P.P, Barrie, Peel A History of Police Selection -​ In place since the early 1900s: -​ 1917: Intelligence tests -​ 1950s: Personality tests -​ 1960s-70s: Psychological/psychiatric screening becomes standard -​ Today: -​ Background checks and selection interviews -​ Higher education requirements -​ Personality assessments, cognitive ability tests, etc. -​ Need for diversity?  Bratovz 4 The Police Selection Process -​ From a research perspective, the police selection process involves 2 stages: 1)​ Job analysis -​ The goal is to define what KSAs make a good police officer: -​ Knowledge, Skills, Abilities -​ Can conduct a job analysis using: -​ survey/interview methods -​ Observational techniques -​ Obstacles: -​ KSAs not stable over time -​ Different KSAs for different jobs -​ Disagreement over important KSAs -​ Despite problems, core KSAs can be agreed on, including: -​ Cognitive - reading, writing, memory -​ Physical - health, fitness -​ Interpersonal - good communication skills, sensitivity -​ Psychological - motivation, flexibility -​ Moral - honesty, integrity, reliability 2)​ Construction & Validation -​ The goal is to: -​ Construct (or select) instruments to measure KSAs -​ Ensure the KSAs are related to job performance -​ Ex. predictive validity is important -​ But what to predict? -​ Difference performance measures may provide different results 1)​ Selection Interviews: -​ Questions are asked to determine if the applicant possesses relevant KSAs -​ Research examining predictive validity is mixed -​ Due in part to low level of agreement between interviewers 2)​ Psychological Tests: -​ Cognitive ability tests are used to assess abilities: -​ Verbal, Mathematical, Memory, Reasoning -​ Ex. PATI -​ Research examining predictive validity indicates higher validity scores for predicting training success than job performance 3)​ Personality Testing: -​ Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory (MMPI) -​ Developed to identify psychological problems -​ May be useful for screening out -​ Research examining predictive validity indicates significant, but low validity scores Example MMPI -​ Depression: I am easily awakened by noise (True) -​ Hysteria: I like to read newspaper articles on crime (False)  Bratovz 5 Personality Testings: -​ Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI): -​ Developed specifically for police selection -​ Research examining predictive validity indicates that the IPI is slightly better than the MMPI Assessment Centres: -​ Facility where the behaviour of applicants is observed by experts -​ Primary selection instrument used is the situational test -​ Ex. real world simulations of policing tasks -​ Research examining predictive validity indicates significant but low validity scores Police Discretion -​ Police discretion involves knowing when to enforce the law and when to allow for some latitude -​ Discretion is required in a wide range of police tasks -​ Required because: -​ Some laws vague, not intended to be fully enforced -​ Full enforcement would alienate the public -​ Full enforcement would overwhelm the criminal justice system -​ Full enforcement would deplete limited police resources -​ Racial profiling: -​ The initiation of police action (Ex. traffic pullovers) based on the race of an individual rather than any evidence of wrongdoing -​ Ex. “DWB” “Carding” -​ Individuals with mental illness -​ Encounters with mentally ill individuals more common since deinstitutionalization -​ Police responses typically include: -​ Informal resolution -​ Escort to psychiatric facility -​ Arrest Discretion: use of force -​ Section 25 of the Canadian Criminal Code - use of force can be used by police on reasonable grounds (requires discretion) -​ Use of force situations receive much attention but only account for a small number of police citizen Police Investigations -​ Police rely on witnesses, and suspects to fill in details about crimes: -​ Who was involves, what happened, where and when did it happen, how and why did it happen -​ Evidence is often collected through interrogations -​ In North America, there are two goals of a police interrogation: -​ Obtain a confession -​ Gain information that will further the investigation (Ex. the location of evidence)  Bratovz 6 Coercive Measures -​ History of coercive measures: -​ Mid 1900s: whipping suspects to get a confession (successful) -​ 1980s: stun guns used by the NYPD to extract confessions (used on teens with drugs) -​ Recently: psychological methods such as trickery and deceit (ex. Lying about evidence) Mr. Big Example -​ Undercover police “recruit” suspect to fake criminal organization -​ Nelson Hart - killed his twin daughters (story kept changing) -​ Supreme court decision on Mr. Big Interrogation -​ Reid Model -​ The Reid Model is a common interrogation method -​ Involves 3 general stages: -​ Gather evidence -​ Conduct a non accusatorial interview to assess deception (guilt) -​ Conduct an accusatorial interrogation to obtain a confession Reid Technique -​ 3 stage involves 9 steps: 1.​ Confront suspect with guilt 2.​ Allow suspect to rationalize 3.​ Interrupt denials 4.​ Overcome suspect’s objections to charges 5.​ Don’t let suspect tune out 6.​ Sympathy, understanding 7.​ Offer explanations 8.​ Develop admission into full crime 9.​ Get suspect to write and sign full confession Ex: Russell williams: highly respected coronal - sentenced for murder, sexual assault, break and enter -​ Designed to make the anxiety associated with deception (Ex. maintaining innocence) greater than anxiety associated with confession -​ In general, Reid techniques can be broken down into 2 categories: -​ Minimization techniques: -​ Soft sell tactics that provide a sense of false security (Ex. justifying the crime) -​ Maximization techniques: -​ Scare tactics that attempt to intimate suspects (Ex. making up evidence) -​ Canadian police officers trained to use Reid model, actual interrogations do not always include Reid techniques -​ There are potential problems with the Reid model: -​ Deception detection -​ Comprehension of legal rights  Bratovz 7 -​ Investigator bias -​ False confessions Admissibility of Confessions -​ Trial judge decides -​ Was it voluntary and was the person competent? -​ Example: Jim Smyth and Cory Armishaw confession thrown out Alternatives -​ PEACE model: -​ Planning & preparation -​ Engage & explain -​ Account -​ Closure -​ Evaluation -​ Closure -​ Evaluation -​ Findings are generally supportive False Confessions -​ False confession - confession is either intentionally fabricated or not based on actual knowledge of facts that form its content -​ According to Innocence Project (U.S.) 1 in 4 exonerated people made false confession Types of False Confessions 1.​ Voluntary - provided with no elicitation from police -​ Can be the result of: -​ A desire for notoriety (be famous) -​ An inability to distinguish fact from fantasy -​ An attempt to protect the real offender, or -​ A need to be punished -​ Ex. JonBenet Ramsey case 2.​ Coerced-Compliant - occurs in response to a desire to escape further interrogation or to gain a promise reward -​ Confessor knows that they did not commit the crime but wants to: -​ Escape further interrogation -​ Gain a promised benefit or -​ Avoid a threatened punishment -​ Ex. Gerry Conlon and the IRA bombings; central Park 5 3.​ Coerced-Internalized -​ Believe they are responsible -​ Typically after a highly suggestive questions -​ Ex. Paul Ingram  Bratovz 8 -​ Daughter saw church counselor and told them they were abusive but he denied and claimed he “forgot” Path to Wrongful Conviction 1.​ Misleading specialized knowledge 2.​ Tunnel vision and confirmation bias 3.​ Motivational biases 4.​ Emotion 5.​ Institutional influences 6.​ Lack of knowledge 7.​ Progressive constriction of relevant evidence Why do jurors believe false confessions? 1.​ Difficulty with self incrimination 2.​ Difficulty with deception detection 3.​ Form and content similarities Criminal Profiling -​ Criminal Profiling is a technique for: -​ Identifying the personality and behavioural features of an offender based on an analysis of the crimes they have committed -​ Used in serial crime investigations, particularly homicide and rape -​ Relatively undocumented -​ WHAT + WHY = WHO Approaches to profiling 1.​ Deductive profiling: profiling an offender from evidence relating tot hat offender’s crimes 2.​ Inductive profiling: profiling from what is known about other offenders who have committed similar (solved) crimes Inductive Approach -​ Organized-disorganized model -​ Organized criminals: -​ Ted Bundy (broken legs, car broken in the back) -​ Plan -​ Target -​ Show self control at crime scene -​ (organized murderers often psychopathic) -​ Deductive Criminals -​ Unplanned -​ Capitalized on chance -​ Behaves haphazardly -​ Analysis of crime senses of 36 convicted serial murders (Ressler et al., 1986) -​ Organized offenders:  Bratovz 9 -​ Plan -​ Use restraints -​ Commit sexual acts with live victims -​ Emphasize control over victim -​ Used vehicle -​ No post-mortem mutilation -​ Little evidence left behind -​ Disorganized offenders: -​ Spontaneous offence -​ Leave weapon/evidence at crime scene -​ Reposition or mutilation of body -​ Perform sexual acts with deal body -​ Take the body or body parts -​ No vehicle Problems with Organized-Disorganized Model -​ Little research has examined the model, but that which has rises doubts as to its validity -​ Cannot account for offenders who display a mixture of organized and disorganized features -​ Criminal profiling is often criticized on the following grounds: 1.​ It lack a strong theoretical base -​ Based on classic trait theory -​ Ignores situational factors 2.​ Core psychological assumptions lack empirical support 3.​ Profiles are too ambiguous to be useful 4.​ Professional profilers are not accurate -​ Ex. Boston Strangler profile Is profiling effective? -​ Rarely leads to identification -​ But… -​ Capture of wayne williams -​ Danger of “locking in on profile characteristics Geographic Profiling -​ Geographic Profiling: involves analysis of crime scene locations to determine the most probable area of offender residence -​ Assumes that offender do not travel long distances from home to commit crimes -​ Geographic profiling systems rely on mathematical models of spatial behaviour -​ Geographic profiling systems can be quite accurate Polygraph Uses -​ Criminal investigations - suspect takes polygraph -​ Verify crime - victim takes polygraph -​ Monitor sexual offenders on probation (US)  Bratovz 10 -​ Pre-employment screening Types of Polygraph -​ Comparison questions test (aka control question test) -​ Includes 3 types of questions -​ Irrelevant (neutral) - are you left or right handed, what is your address? -​ Relevant - did you assault this person, did you commit the crime? -​ Comparison - should arouse the person -​ Deception assessed by comparing physiological responses between relevant and comparison questions Comparison Question Test: Phases -​ Pre-test interview: develop comparison questions -​ Polygraph exam: questions asked and suspect’s physiological responses are measured -​ Scoring: determine if suspect is truthful, deceptive, or inconclusive -​ Post-test Interview: if suspect is judged deceptive, pressure to confess Comparison Question Test Assumptions -​ Guilty people react more to relevant questions and innocent react more to comparison questions Types of polygraph -​ Concealed Information Test (also Guilty Knowledge Test) -​ Assesses whether suspect has information only the criminal would know -​ Multiple choice format -​ Assumes guilty suspect will react to correct info -​ Rarely used in North America Types of Polygraph Studies -​ Laboratory Studies -​ Ground truth is known -​ Limited application to real-life situations  Bratovz 11 -​ Field Studies -​ Real-life situations and actual suspects -​ Ground truth is not known Accuracy of Comparative Question Test -​ Majority of guilty suspects correctly identified -​ 84% to 92% guilty correctly identified -​ Relatively large number of “innocent” suspects falsely identified as guilty -​ 9% to 24% false positive errors -​ No field studies have been conducted in North America -​ Lab studies: very accurate at identifying innocent participants -​ Around 95% correctly identified -​ Less accurate at identifying guilty participants (76%-85%) Beat the Polygraph? -​ Countermeasures: -​ Both physical and mental countermeasures dramatically reduce the effectiveness of the CQT -​ The polygraph does not appear to be affected by anti anxiety drugs Admissibility -​ Did not pass general acceptance test when first admitted as evidence in court -​ Not admissible into evidence in canadian courts Other measures -​ Thermal imaging -​ Detects facial warming due to blood flow -​ Event-related brain potentials (ERP) -​ Brain activity -​ P300 used to detect guilty knowledge -​ Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI): -​ Measures differences in brain activity when people are honest vs deceptive Deception Detection: Verbal Cues -​ Verbal cues most consistently related to deception include: -​ Higher voice pitch -​ Increased speech disturbance (ah, umm) -​ Slower speech -​ Pattern of verbal cues may depend on how complex lie is -​ Liars provide fewer details -​ Liars told less plausible stories -​ Liars less fluent -​ Liars more nervous -​ Truth tellers self-correct -​ Truth tellers admit to forgetting  Bratovz 12 Non-Verbal Characteristics of Deception -​ Emotional leakage - expression of genuine emotion when person is trying to mask or conceal it -​ Blink rate? -​ Decrease in body movements? Deception Detection -​ Meta-analysis (Aamodt & Cluster, 2006) -​ Chance level: 50% -​ Professionals: 55.5% (police, judges) -​ Non-Professionals: 54.2 (everyone else) -​ Bond & DePaula (2006) - experts no better than non-experts -​ Why is deception detection so poor -​ No single, reliable and valid indicator -​ Stereotypic beliefs -​ Eye gaze -​ Fidgeting -​ Truth bias -​ Training Malingering -​ Malingering - intentional faking psychological or physical symptoms for some types of external gain -​ Why? 1.​ Avoid punishment (ex. Not guilty by reason of mental disorder) 2.​ Drug seeking or transfer to psychiatric facility 3.​ Disability claims, workers’ compensation, lawsuit 4.​ Admission to hospital (bed, meals) 5.​ Avoid military duties -​ Ex. David Berkowitz -​ Prevalence quite high in forensic contexts -​ Ex. 45% of profiles for competency at time of offence appeared invalid -​ About 30% of disability and personal injury claims for PTSD may be faked Malingering vs Defensiveness -​ Defensiveness - conscious denial or minimization of symptoms -​ Fit parent or candidate -​ Might not want to admit to self -​ Ex. Ted Kaczynski, Dylan Roof Malingering: Explanatory Models 1.​ Pathogenic Model -​ Assumes underlying mental disorder -​ Patient attempts to gain control over pathology by creating fictitious symptoms -​ Little empirical support  Bratovz 13 2.​ Criminological Model -​ Malingering characterized by: -​ Lack of cooperation with evaluation -​ Discrepancy between person’s account and objective observations -​ Little empirical support 3.​ Adaptational Model -​ Malingering likely to occur when: -​ A perceived adversarial context is present -​ Personal stakes are very high -​ No other viable alternatives are perceived -​ Research findings support this model Research Assessing Malingering -​ 3 designs 1.​ Case Study -​ Useful for generating a wide variety of hypotheses -​ Study rare syndromes (Ex. Munchausen by proxy) 2.​ Simulation Design -​ Most frequency used -​ Participants are told to malinger a specific disorder and compared to -​ Control group -​ Clinical comparison group -​ High experimental rigour -​ Limited generalizability to the real world 3.​ Known groups design -​ Involves 2 stages: -​ Establishing the criterion groups (Ex. genuine patients and malingers) -​ Analysis of the similarities and differences between criterion groups -​ Good generalizability to real-world settings -​ Problems classifying criterion groups Malingered Psychosis -​ Clues regarding the symptoms: -​ Report rare, atypical symptoms, or absurd symptoms -​ Report atypical delusions or hallucinations -​ Absence of subtle symptoms -​ Continuous hallucinations rather than intermittent -​ Other clues: -​ Motive for crime -​ Crime fits pattern of criminal history -​ Presence of accomplice -​ Symptoms emerge suddenly -​ Discrepancies between interview and non-interview behaviour -​ Vince Li - beheaded a passenger (motiveless crime), Luka Magnotta - killed boyfriend  Bratovz 14 Detecting Malingered Psychosis -​ Interview -​ The Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms -​ Structured interview -​ 172 items organized into 8 scales -​ Research indicates good validity -​ Predetermined questions -​ Self-report personality inventories -​ MMPI/MMPI-2 -​ Contains infrequency (F) scale and the Back F (FB) scale selected to detect unusual or atypical symptoms -​ Research indicates useful for detecting malingerers Thomas Sophonow -​ Tried 3 times for murder of Barbara Stoppel Role of Memory -​ Eyewitness testimony relies on memory, which is the interplay of: -​ Encoding: the process by which information gets into memory -​ Storage: the retention of information over time -​ Retrieval: taking information out of storage -​ Two types of memory retrieval: -​ Recall memory: reporting details of a previously witnessed event/person -​ Recognition memory: determining whether what is currently being viewed/heard is the same as previously witnessed item/person Encoding -​ Attention - concentrating and focusing mental resources Eyewitness Research -​ Two types of independent variables in eyewitness research: -​ Estimator variables: present at the time of crime and cannot be changed (Ex. age of witness) -​ System variables: can be manipulated to increase (or decrease) eyewitness accuracy (Ex. lineup procedure, questioning technique) -​ Three general dependent variables used in eyewitness studies: -​ Recall of the event -​ Recall of the perpetrator -​ Recognition of the perpetrator Recall of Crime 1 & 2. Recall of the event and perpetrator can take two forms: -​ Open-ended recall/free narrative: witnesses are asked to recount what they witnessed without being prompted -​ Direct question recall: witnesses are asked specific question about the event/perpetrator  Bratovz 15 3. Recognition of perpetration lineup: Witnesses are asked to identify perpetrator -​ Assess for accuracy of decision and types of errors Eyewitness Research: Interview -​ Archival research -​ Police officers impeded interview process by: -​ Interrupting -​ Asking short specific questions -​ Asking questioning not relevant to what the witness is currently describing -​ Asking leading questions Contamination -​ Memory conformity witnesses can be “contaminated” by information they may become aware of from other witnesses Misinformation Effect -​ From laboratory simulation studies: -​ Misinformation effect: -​ Witness incorporates inaccurate information presented after an event into their later recall -​ Participants given misinformation provide different reports than those who receive no misleading information -​ Subtle differences in phrasing of the question may bias witnesses responses -​ Three theories attempt to explain the misinformation effect: -​ Misinformation acceptance hypothesis -​ Source misattribution hypothesis -​ Memory impairment hypothesis -​ The procedures used in the investigative process to aid eyewitness recall include: 1.​ Hypnosis: -​ Facilitates retrieval but memories may not be accurate -​ Greater information recalled when participants close their eyes -​ Usually not admissible in court 2.​ Cognitive Interview -​ Based on memory retrieval techniques: -​ Reinstating the context -​ Reporting everything -​ Recalling event in different orders -​ Changing perspective 3.​ Enhanced Cognitive Interview -​ Rapport building -​ Supportive interviewer behaviour -​ Transfer of control -​ Focused retrieval -​ Witness compatible questioning  Bratovz 16 Cognitive Interviews -​ Both cognitive interviews elicit more information than standard police interviews -​ Increase in accurate information -​ Unclear which components elicit this increase Recall of Perpetrator -​ Descriptions of perpetrator by eyewitnesses are lacking in detail and accuracy -​ Gender, hair, clothing, and height are commonly reported descriptors Recognition Memory -​ Recognition memory can be tested in a number of ways (Voice ID, video surveillance) or: -​ Live lineups or photo arrays -​ Photo arrays faster to construct, portable, no right to counsel, no behavioural clues, less witness anxiety Lineup Identification -​ Witness asked to identify a perpetrator from a lineup -​ Lineups contain: -​ Suspect -​ Foil (distractors) In research: -​ Target-present Lineup: lineup contains the perpetrator -​ Target-absent Lineup: lineup contains an innocent suspect Lineup Procedures -​ Simultaneous Lineup: A common lineup procedure that presents all lineup members at one time to the witness -​ Sequential Lineup: lineup members are presented serially to the witness -​ Showup: only the suspect is shown to the witness -​ Walk-by: witness taken to a public location where the suspect is likely to be  Bratovz 17 Types of Lineup Judgements -​ 2 types of judgments may be used in lineup procedures: -​ Relative Judgement: comparing lineup members to one another and choosing the one who looks most like perpetrator -​ Absolute Judgement: shown 1 picture shown, does this photo match my memory of the perpetrator Comparing Lineups -​ Sequential lineups increase the likelihood of a correct rejection compared to the simultaneous procedure Biased lineups -​ Suggest who the police suspect and thereby who the witness should identify -​ Types of biases that increase false identification: -​ Foil bias -​ Ex. Ivan Henry -​ Clothing Bias - if the guy was wearing a white hat, put all the suspects in a white hat -​ Instruction Bias - dont tell us that the perpetrator is in the lineup, be straightforward Voice Identification -​ Longer samples lead to greater accuracy -​ Decreased accuracy for: -​ Whispering -​ Disguising the voice -​ Unfamiliar accents -​ Placing the target voice near the end of the lineup -​ Showing the face along with the voice -​ Larger number of foils Witness Confidence -​ A small positive correlation between a witness’s confidence and their identification accuracy -​ Confidence can be manipulated with post identification feedback -​ Mock jurors do not appear sensitive to “inflated confidence” -​ Ex. Ronald Cotton -​ Confidence convinces us that they got it right, manipulates  Bratovz 18 Estimator Variables Age: -​ Younger and old adults (over 60) produce comparable correct identification rates (from target present lineups) -​ Old adults produce lower correct rejection rates (from target-absent lineups) compared to younger adults Race: -​ Cross-race effect - witnesses can remember faces of their own race more accurately than faces of other races Weapons -​ Weapons focus: focus being on the perpetrator’s weapon rather than on the perpetrator Identification Guidelines -​ The person who conducts the lineup should not be aware of who the suspect is -​ Eyewitnesses should be informed the perpetrator may not be present in the lineup -​ The suspect should not stand out -​ A clear statement regarding a witness’ confidence should be taken at the time of identification Canada: Sophonow Inquiry Recommendations -​ The lineup procedure should be videotaped or audiotaped -​ Officers should inform witnesses that is just as important to clear innocent suspects -​ The photo lineup should be presented sequentially -​ Officers should not discuss a witness’ identification with him or her