Memory distortion in eyewitnesses: a meta-analysis of the post-identification feedback effect

By A. Douglass, N. Steblay. 2006

130 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2ec81f6a17fee587f067ebfdbbbe8450b28756ae

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. Raphael Gillett
2. N. Steblay
3. G. Wells
4. Andy Field
5. A. Douglass
6. John G. Grundy
7. Luke Plonsky
8. Jian-E Peng

Citations in the corpus

• The Eyewitness Post Identification Feedback Effect 15 Years Later: Theoretical and Policy Implications (2014, methodology): “The current meta-analysis of published peer-reviewed research incorporates twice the published articles of the feedback effect tested in Douglass and Steblay (2006), some 7,000 witnessparticipants (2,400 were reviewed by Douglass and Steblay), and, perhaps more importantly, includes moderator variab”
• How to do a meta-analysis. (2010, background): “…2004), whether language affects theory of mind performance (Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007), whether eyewitnesses have biased memories of events (Douglass & Steblay, 2006), whether temperament differs across gender (Else-Quest, Hyde, Goldsmith, & Van Hulle, 2006), the neuropsychological effects…”