Abstract:Introduction: Despite converging evidence that people more closely associate the construct of criminality with Black people who exhibit a more African facial phenotype than Black people who express a more European phenotype, eyewitness researchers have largely ignored phenotypic bias as a potential contributor to the racial disparities in the criminal legal system. If this form of phenotypic bias extends to eyewitness identification tasks, eyewitnesses may be more likely to identify Black suspects with an African rather than European phenotype, regardless of their guilt status. Further, in cases where the witness's description of the perpetrator does not contain phenotypic information, phenotypic mismatch between the suspect and the other lineup members may bias identification decisions toward or against the suspect. If witnesses can use elements of the lineup construction to guide their identification decisions rather than relying on their recognition memory, then the lineup should be deemed unfair due to suspect bias. The current study also investigated lineup presentation method as a procedural safeguard, predicting that that when lineups were presented simultaneously, there would be a significant two-way interaction of phenotypic bias and lineup composition, with a larger simple main effect of phenotypic bias when lineups were suspect-biased (i.e., the fillers were a phenotypic mismatch to the suspect) than when all lineup members shared the same phenotype. We expected that this interaction would be significantly smaller or non-significant for sequential lineups. Methods: Participants watched a mock crime video that contained a Black culprit with either a more African phenotype or a less African phenotype before attempting identifications from a photo array that contained a suspect whose phenotype always matched the culprit viewed in the video, but varied in culprit-presence, phenotypic match of the suspect and fillers, and presentation method. Results: Participants did not identify Black suspects with Afrocentric features more often than Black suspects with Eurocentric features. However, witnesses made more identifications of suspects when the fillers did not match the suspect's phenotype compared to when all lineup members possessed similar phenotypic features. Discussion: In sum, phenotypic bias did not influence our participant-witnesses' identification decisions, nor interact with lineup composition and lineup presentation type to affect identifications of suspects, suggesting that phenotypic bias may be less influential in match-to-memory tasks than other types of legal decision-making (e.g., determining guilt and sentencing). However, the suggestiveness created by failing to match fillers' phenotypes to the suspect's phenotype can be avoided with proper attention to fair lineup construction.

The biasing nature of gang evidence: inducing memory errors for evidence of past criminal behavior

Laypeople's beliefs about the effects of common estimator variables on memory

The effects of cognitive bias, examiner expertise, and stimulus material on forensic evidence analysis

The effect of confirmation bias and racial stereotypes on perceptions of guilt and interrogation strategy decisions

Police evaluation of evidence: statistical format and evidence type

Innocent until primed: mock jurors' racially biased response to the presumption of innocence

The perfect match: Do criminal stereotypes bias forensic evidence analysis?

No evidence for neuroscience bias in adult or juvenile cases: A pre-registered mock juror study

Suspect race affects defense attorney evaluations of preidentification evidence

Phenotypic mismatch between suspects and fillers but not phenotypic bias increases eyewitness identifications of Black suspects

Evidence for selective emotional memory enhancement in a mock witness paradigm.

Mock jurors' evaluations of eyewitness identification evidence based on appearance change and associated instructions

The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making

Jury instructions should prioritize reflector variables recorded during the first test of an eyewitness' memory.

False memories in forensic psychology: do cognition and brain activity tell the same story?

Demonstrative Evidence and the Use of Algorithms in Jury Trials

On the presumption of evidentiary independence: can confessions corrupt eyewitness identifications?

Discounting testimony with the argument ad hominem and a Bayesian congruent prior model.

Memory Errors in Alibi Generation: How an Alibi Can Turn Against Us

Does presenting perpetrator and innocent suspect faces from different facial angles influence the susceptibility of eyewitness memory? An investigation into the misinformation effect and eyewitness misidentification

Examining the effects of evidence disclosure timing and strength on information inconsistencies and provision within investigative interviews