Lineup identification procedures result in more accurate decisions relative to showups. This superior performance is seen even in situations where showups have a memorial advantage (i.e. administered immediately after a crime). Nonetheless, showups remain the most used identification procedure due to their ability to exculpate innocent individuals and allow pursuit of other leads. While researchers and legal officials recognise the suggestibility of showups, it is unclear whether these differences are recognised by laypersons. We examined this issue across three experiments. Experiment 1 explored how identification procedure (lineup vs. showup) and lineup decision (identification vs. rejection) influenced perceptions of accuracy. Experiments 2A (student sample) and 2B (community sample) provided participants information about when identification procedures occurred (immediately or after delay). Experiment 3 warned participants about the reduced accuracy of showups compared to lineups, including the lower accuracy of immediate showups versus delayed lineups. Participants were generally insensitive to the inaccuracies of showups and perceived them as reliable as lineups. Participants also demonstrated a bias toward immediate decisions relative to those after delay, which translated to a bias toward immediate showups relative to delayed lineups. This preference for immediate decisions proved robust as even explicit warnings did little to temper this effect.
Fei et al. (Wed,) studied this question.