Baldassari, Mario J.2014-01-202014-01-2020132014-01-20http://hdl.handle.net/1828/5166Witnesses sometimes mistakenly identify innocent suspects in lineups from which the real culprit is absent, and those errors can have tragic consequences. Can we estimate in advance a witness’s susceptibility to making false identifications in culprit-absent lineups? Kantner and Lindsay (2012) found that response criterion on a standard test of old/new recognition (of faces or words) correlated with the likelihood of making lineup identifications. Four experiments tested the predictive utility of a two-alternative forced choice facial recognition test that included trials in which neither face had been studied. Through Experiment 3 we observed several weak predictive relationships, including confidence on the facial recognition test with confidence on the lineup test, but not the hypothesized relationship: that the rate of false alarms on the TA face recognition trials would predict false alarm rates on the target-absent lineup trials. Experiment 4 implemented a substantial increase in the number of face recognition trials displaying two non-studied faces (from 4 trials to 30) and the originally hypothesized relationship was found (r=.45). Implications for future research aimed at developing measures with real-world utility are discussed.enMemoryEyewitness identificationThesisAvailable to the World Wide Web