IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/proeco/v184y2017icp95-106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paradigm shift in criminal police lineups: Eyewitness identification as multicriteria decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Mu, Enrique
  • Chung, Tingting Rachel
  • Reed, Lawrence Ian

Abstract

This study is rooted in the recognition that multi-criteria decision analysis can contribute to the improvement of policies and procedures in police work and in the criminal justice system as a whole. More specifically, this research proposes a novel way to address police lineups for eyewitness identification purposes. Traditional methods present suspects sequentially (SEQ method) one by one using a Yes-No memory recognition approach rooted in psychology. The proposed method is a paradigm shift because it treats eyewitness identification as a prioritization rather than a memory recognition task and presents suspects, not sequentially, but in pairs (PAIR approach). The PAIR approach uses a pairwise comparison and prioritization approach, rooted in multi-criteria decision making, to identify the target culprit. This research shows that, in comparison to the Yes-No memory recognition method, the PAIR approach results in significantly fewer false identifications while keeping comparable or better correct identifications. These findings have the potential to greatly improve eyewitness testimony. This is very important because false identifications are the leading cause of wrongful conviction of innocent people. Therefore, this research has the potential to dramatically improve current police and judicial practices leading to a more just world.

Suggested Citation

  • Mu, Enrique & Chung, Tingting Rachel & Reed, Lawrence Ian, 2017. "Paradigm shift in criminal police lineups: Eyewitness identification as multicriteria decision making," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 95-106.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:184:y:2017:i:c:p:95-106
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527316303425
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horton & David Rand & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 399-425, September.
    2. Lundberg, C. Gustav, 2004. "Modeling and predicting emerging inference-based decisions in complex and ambiguous legal settings," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 417-432, March.
    3. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    4. Pekkanen, Petra & Niemi, Petri, 2013. "Process performance improvement in justice organizations—Pitfalls of performance measurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(2), pages 605-611.
    5. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    6. Gorman, Michael F. & Ruggiero, John, 2008. "Evaluating US state police performance using data envelopment analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 1031-1037, June.
    7. Correa, Hector, 2005. "A game theoretic analysis of interactions between law abiding citizens and criminals with respect to ownership of guns," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 109-123, June.
    8. Saaty, Thomas L. & Mu, Enrique, 1997. "The Peruvian Hostage Crisis of 1996-1997: What Should the Government Do?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 165-172, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nikola Kadoić & Diana Šimić & Jasna Mesarić & Nina Begičević Ređep, 2021. "Measuring Quality of Public Hospitals in Croatia Using a Multi-Criteria Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-28, September.
    2. Yuli L. León & Enrique Mu, 2021. "Organizational Mindfulness Assessment and Its Impact on Rational Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-29, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lechthaler, Wolfgang & Ring, Patrick, 2021. "Labor force participation, job search effort and unemployment insurance in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 748-778.
    2. Heinicke, Franziska & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Weitzel, Utz, 2019. "The effect of pledges on the distribution of lying behavior: An online experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 136-151.
    3. Nina Almasifar & Tülay Özdemir Canbolat & Milad Akhavan & Roberto Alonso González-Lezcano, 2021. "Proposing a New Methodology for Monument Conservation “SCOPE MANAGEMENT” by the Use of an Analytic Hierarchy Process Project Management Institute System and the ICOMOS Burra Charter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    5. Mariconda, Simone & Lurati, Francesco, 2015. "Does familiarity breed stability? The role of familiarity in moderating the effects of new information on reputation judgments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 957-964.
    6. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    7. Simon Gächter & Lingbo Huang & Martin Sefton, 2016. "Combining “real effort” with induced effort costs: the ball-catching task," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 687-712, December.
    8. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    9. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    10. Guenther, Isabel & Tetteh-Baah, Samuel Kofi, 2019. "The impact of discrimination on redistributive preferences and productivity: experimental evidence from the United States," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203652, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Mortenson, Michael J. & Doherty, Neil F. & Robinson, Stewart, 2015. "Operational research from Taylorism to Terabytes: A research agenda for the analytics age," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 583-595.
    12. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    13. Isabel-María García-Sánchez & Luis Rodríguez-Domínguez & Javier Parra-Domínguez, 2013. "Yearly evolution of police efficiency in Spain and explanatory factors," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 21(1), pages 31-62, January.
    14. Lim, Chulmin & Rowsell, Joe & Kim, Seongcheol, 2023. "Exploring the killer domains to create new value: A Comparative case study of Canadian and Korean telcos," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277998, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    15. Jeanette A.M.J. Deetlefs & Mathew Chylinski & Andreas Ortmann, 2015. "MTurk ‘Unscrubbed’: Exploring the good, the ‘Super’, and the unreliable on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk," Discussion Papers 2015-20, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    16. Syntetos, Aris A. & Kholidasari, Inna & Naim, Mohamed M., 2016. "The effects of integrating management judgement into OUT levels: In or out of context?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 853-863.
    17. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Cantarella, Michele & Strozzi, Chiara, 2019. "Workers in the Crowd: The Labour Market Impact of the Online Platform Economy," IZA Discussion Papers 12327, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    20. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2019. "Do People Value More Informative News?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8026, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:184:y:2017:i:c:p:95-106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.