Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan;45(1):93-104.
doi: 10.3758/s13421-016-0642-7.

Feelings of familiarity and false memory for specific associations resulting from mugshot exposure

Affiliations

Feelings of familiarity and false memory for specific associations resulting from mugshot exposure

Alan W Kersten et al. Mem Cognit. 2017 Jan.

Abstract

This research reveals that mugshot viewing accompanied by questions about an action can cause young adults to associate the pictured person and the queried action, leading to later false recollection of having seen that person perform that action. In contrast, mugshot viewing in older adults can lead to vague feelings of familiarity for the pictured person, encouraging older adults to later falsely recognize the pictured person performing any familiar action. Participants viewed events involving actors performing different actions and then were asked verbal questions about which actor had performed each action, with each question accompanied by mugshots of potential "perpetrators" of the action. In a later recognition test, older adults were more likely to falsely recognize a novel conjunction of a familiar actor and action if they had seen a mugshot of that actor, regardless of whether the mugshot had accompanied a question about that action. In contrast, young adults were more likely to falsely recognize a conjunction event only if it involved an actor whose mugshot had accompanied a question about that particular action. This effect remained when the analysis was limited to trials involving actors whose mugshots had not been previously selected, implicating false recollection rather than commitment effects.

Keywords: Aging; Eyewitness testimony; False memory; Familiarity; Recognition memory; Recollection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Proportions of “Yes” responses to the Old, Conjunction, and New items by the three participant groups, with the three types of Conjunction items aggregated together into a single category. “Yes” responses to the Old items were correct, whereas “yes” responses to the Conjunction and New items constituted errors. Error bars represent standard errors of each mean.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Proportions of incorrect “Yes” responses to the three different types of Conjunction items by the three participant groups. Error bars represent standard errors of each mean.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Proportions of incorrect “Yes” responses to Consistent Conjunction items in relation to participants’ earlier selections in the mugshot trials. Target Actor Selected indicates that the actor performing the action in a recognition item had been previously selected in the mugshot trials as having performed that action. Other Actor Selected indicates that the actor performing the action in a recognition item had not been previously selected in the mugshot trials, but rather the other actor who had appeared with this actor had been selected. Neither Actor Selected indicates that the actor performing the action in a recognition item had not been previously selected in the mugshot trials, but rather neither actor had been selected. Error bars represent standard errors of each mean.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Proportions of incorrect “Yes” responses to Consistent Conjunction and Inconsistent Conjunction items involving actions for which neither actor had been selected in the mugshot trials, and involving actors that had not previously been selected as having performed some other action. Error bars represent standard errors of each mean.

References

    1. Blunt MR, & McAllister HA (2009). Mug shot exposure effects: Does size matter? Law & Human Behavior, 33, 175–182. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9126-z - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brigham JC, & Cairns DL (1988). The effect of mugshot inspections on eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1394–1410. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01214.x - DOI
    1. Brown E, Deffenbacher K, & Sturgill W (1977). Memory for faces and the circumstances of encounter. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 311–318. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.62.3.311 - DOI
    1. Deffenbacher KA, Bornstein BH, & Penrod SD (2006). Mugshot exposure effects: Retroactive interference, mugshot commitment, source confusion, and unconscious transference. Law & Human Behavior, 30, 287–307. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-006-9008-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dysart JE, Lindsay RCL, Hammond R, & Dupuis P (2001). Mug shot exposure prior to lineup identification: Interference, transference, and commitment effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1280–1284. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1280 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources