Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40847249›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2025

A multi-item signal detection theory model for eyewitness identification.

Yueran Yang, Janice L Burke, Justice Healy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yueran YangDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV, USA. yuerany@unr.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9261-5608
Janice L BurkeInterdisciplinary Social Psychology Ph.D. Program, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1221-6936
Justice HealyInterdisciplinary Social Psychology Ph.D. Program, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9690-3367

Funding

National Science Foundation SES-2017046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do witnesses make identification decisions when viewing a lineup? Understanding the witness decision-making process is essential for researchers to develop methods that can reduce mistaken identifications and improve lineup practices. Yet, the inclusion of fillers has posed a pivotal challenge to this task because the traditional signal detection theory is only applicable to binary decisions and cannot easily incorporate lineup fillers. This paper proposes a multi-item signal detection theory (mSDT) model to help understand the witness decision-making process. The mSDT model clarifies the importance of considering the joint distributions of suspect and filler signals. The model also visualizes the joint distributions in a multivariate decision space, which allows for the incorporation of all eyewitness responses, including suspect identifications, filler identifications, and rejections. The paper begins with a set of simple assumptions to develop the mSDT model and then explores alternative assumptions that can potentially accommodate more sophisticated considerations. The paper further discusses the implications of the mSDT model. With a mathematical modeling and visualization approach, the mSDT model provides a novel theoretical framework for understanding eyewitness identification decisions and addressing debates around eyewitness SDT and ROC applications.

Indexed as

Decision MakingMental RecallModels, PsychologicalModels, TheoreticalPsychological TheoryRecognition, PsychologySignal Detection, PsychologicalHumansEyewitness decision makingEyewitness identificationEyewitness memorySignal detection theory

Identifiers

PMID40847249
PMCPMC12373971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.