Abstract：
Previous research has reported diverging patterns of results with respect to discriminability and response bias when comparing the simultaneous lineup to two different lineup procedures in which items are presented sequentially, the sequential stopping rule lineup and the UK lineup. In a single large sample experiment, we compared discriminability and response bias in six-item photographic lineups presented either simultaneously, sequentially with a stopping rule, or sequentially requiring two full laps through the items before making an identification and including the ability to revisit items, analogous to the UK lineup procedure. Discriminability was greater for the simultaneous lineup compared to the sequential stopping rule lineup, despite a non-significant difference in empirical discriminability between the procedures. There was no significant difference in discriminability when comparing the simultaneous lineup to the sequential two lineup and the sequential two lap lineup to the sequential stopping rule lineup. Responding was most lenient for the sequential two lap lineup, followed by the simultaneous lineup, followed by the sequential lineup. These results imply that sequential item presentation may not exert a large effect in isolation on discriminability and response bias. Rather, discriminability and response bias in the sequential stopping rule lineup and UK lineup result from the interaction of sequential item presentation with other aspects of these procedures.
摘要：
先前的研究报告了在将同时阵容与两个不同的阵容程序进行比较时，在区分性和响应偏差方面，结果存在不同的模式，顺序停止规则阵容和英国阵容。在单个大样本实验中，我们比较了同时呈现的六项摄影阵容中的可辨别性和响应偏差，有一个停止规则，或者在进行识别并包括重新访问物品的能力之前，依次要求对物品进行两圈完整的检查，类似于英国的阵容程序。与顺序停止规则阵容相比，同时阵容的可识别性更大，尽管这两个程序之间的经验辨别性没有显著差异。将同时阵容与连续两个阵容以及连续两个圈阵容与连续停止规则阵容进行比较时，可判别性没有显着差异。对于连续的两圈阵容，回应是最宽容的，紧随其后的是同时阵容，其次是顺序阵容。这些结果表明，顺序项目呈现可能不会对辨别性和响应偏差产生很大影响。相反，序贯停止规则阵容和英国阵容中的可辨别性和反应偏差是由于序贯项目呈现与这些程序的其他方面的相互作用所致.
