Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41838314›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2026

Validating a multinomial processing tree model for measuring confidence in lineups using a post-response feedback manipulation.

Raoul Bell, Nicola Marie Menne, Axel Buchner

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2026. 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.

Raoul BellDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. raoul.bell@hhu.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0592-0362
Nicola Marie MenneDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9421-8286
Axel BuchnerDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4529-3444

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft BU 945/10-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Confidence in lineup responses is important in research and practice. Here we introduce the lineup confidence model, an extension of the well-validated two-high threshold eyewitness identification model. The two-high threshold eyewitness identification model serves to measure four cognitive processes underlying lineup responses: culprit-presence detection, culprit-absence detection, biased suspect selection and guessing-based selection. The lineup confidence model additionally incorporates the measurement of confidence. To validate the lineup confidence model, we conducted an experiment with a large sample size (N = 1565) using post-response feedback as a manipulation of confidence. Confidence followed a predictable and psychologically plausible pattern: responses based on detection were more likely to result in high confidence than responses based on guessing, and responses based on biased suspect selection were also more likely to result in high confidence than responses based on guessing. Importantly, post-response feedback selectively influenced confidence while leaving the parameters for culprit-presence detection, culprit-absence detection, biased suspect selection and guessing-based selection unaffected. Confidence can thus be measured with the model without compromising the measurement of the other processes specified by the model. This successful validation indicates that the lineup confidence model may be useful for examining how lineup characteristics and external factors influence confidence as a function of the processes underlying lineup responses.

Indexed as

Feedback, PsychologicalMetacognitionModels, PsychologicalHumansConfidence judgementsEyewitness identificationLineupsMultinomial processing tree modelPost-identification feedback

Identifiers

PMID41838314
PMCPMC12992753

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.