References
- Abberton, E., & Fourcin, A. (1978). Intonation and speaker identification. Language and Speech, 21(4), 305–318.
- Bornstein, B. H., Golding, J. M., Neuschatz, J., Kimbrough, C., Reed, K., Magyarics, C., & Luecht, K. (2017). Mock juror sampling issues in jury simulation research: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 41(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000223
- Bruce, V. (1982). Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 73(Pt 1), 105–116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1982.tb01795.x
- Bruer, K. C., Harvey, M. B., Adams, A. S., & Price, H. L. (2017). Judicial discussion of eyewitness identification evidence. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences du Comportement, 49(4), 209–220. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000084
- Fitzgerald, R. J., & Price, H. L. (2015). Eyewitness identification across the life span: A meta-analysis of age differences. Psychological Bulletin, 141(6), 1228–1265. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000013
- Foulkes, P., & Barron, A. (2000). Telephone speaker recognition amongst members of a close social network. Forensic Linguistics, 7, 180–198. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1558/sll.2000.7.2.180
- Hanel, P. H. P., & Vione, K. C. (2016). Do student samples provide an accurate estimate of the general public? PLOS One, 11(12), e0168354. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168354
- Hill, H., & Bruce, V. (1996). Effects of lighting on the perception of facial surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(4), 986–1004. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.22.4.986
- Johnston, R. A., & Edmonds, A. J. (2009). Familiar and unfamiliar face recognition: A review. Memory (Hove, England), 17(5), 577–596. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210902976969
- Lindsay, R. C. L., Lim, R., Marando, L., & Cully, D. (1986). Mock-juror evaluations of eyewitness testimony: A test of metamemory hypotheses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(5), 447–459. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-816.1986.tb01151.x
- Mcallister, H., Dale, R., & Keay, C. (1993). Effects of lineup modality on witness credibility. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133(3), 365–376. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1993.9712155
- Moreland, R., & Beach, S. (1992). Exposure effects in the classroom: The development of affinity among students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28(3), 255–276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(92)90055-0
- Morrison, G. S., Sahito, F. H., Jardine, G., Djokic, D., Clavet, S., Berghs, S., & Goemans Dorny, C. (2016). INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies. Forensic Science International, 263, 92–100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044
- Pica, E., Sheahan, C., Mesesan, A., & Pozzulo, J. D. (2018). The influence of prior familiarity, identification delay, appearance change, and descriptor type and errors on mock jurors’ judgments. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 33(4), 289–301. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-017-9251-z
- Pozzulo, J. D., Pettalia, J. L., Bruer, K., & Javid, S. (2014). Eyewitness age and familiarity with the defendant: Influential factors in mock jurors’ assessment of defendant guilt? American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 32, 39–51. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/e571212013-474
- Pozzulo, J., Pica, E., & Sheahan, C. (2019). Familiarity and conviction in the criminal justice system: Definitions, theory, and eyewitness research. Oxford University Press.
- Ross, D. R., Jurden, F. H, Lindsay, R. C. L., & Keeney, J. M. (2003). Replications and limitations of a two-factor model of child witness credibility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 418–431. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01903.x
- R. v. Anderson. (2014). BCSC 1517 (CanLII). https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2014/2014bcsc1517/2014bcsc1517.html
- R. v. Gillis. (2008). NSPC 24 (CanLII). https://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nspc/doc/2008/2008nspc24/2008nspc24.html
- R. v. Roberts. (2016). CanLII 3174 (NL SC). https://www.canlii.org/en/nl/nlsctd/doc/2016/2016canlii3174/2016canlii3174.html
- R. v. Saddleback. (2013). ABCA 250. https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc/2013/2013abca250/2013abca250.html
- Sheahan, C. L., Pozzulo, J. D., Reed, J. E., & Pica, E. (2018). The role of familiarity with the defendant, type of descriptor discrepancy, and eyewitness age on mock jurors’ perceptions of eyewitness testimony. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 33(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-017-9232-2
- Sherrin, C. (2015). Earwitness evidence: The reliability of voice identifications. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 52, 819–862. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol52/iss3/3
- Vallano, J. P., Pettalia, J., Pica, E., & Pozzulo, J. D. (2018). An examination of mock jurors’ judgments in familiar identification cases. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 34(2), 121–133. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-018-9266-0
- Vallano, J. P., Slapinski, K. A., Steele, L. J., Briggs, A. P., & Pozzulo, J. D. (2019). Familiar eyewitness identifications: The current state affairs. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 25(3), 128–146. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000204
- Yarmey, A. D., Yarmey, A. L., Yarmey, M. J., & Parliament, L. (2001). Commonsense beliefs and the identification of familiar voices. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.702