​

2024

​

Ying, R. C.* & Smith, A. M. (2024). Perceptions of task fluency mislead judgments of eyewitness accuracy.​ Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition.

 

Ayala, N. T.*, Smith, A. M., & Wells, G. L. (2024). Beyond the confidence-accuracy relation: A multiple-reflector-variable approach to postdicting accuracy on eyewitness lineups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.

 

Smith, A. M., Ayala, N. T.*, & Ying, R. C.* (2024). Using artificial intelligence to assess eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 

​

Smith, A. M., Ying, R. C.*, Goldstein, A. R.*, & Fitzgerald, R. J. (2024). Absolute-judgment models better predict eyewitness decision-making than do relative-judgment models. Cognition, 251, 105877. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105877

 

Ayala, N. T.* & Smith, A. M. (2024). Predicting and postdicting identification accuracy on forensic-object lineups. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000171

 

Smith, A. M. & Wells, G. L. (2024). Cartridge-case examiners' aversion to true rejections: A shocking problem with use of the inconclusive category. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 13, 156 - 157. https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000161

​

Smith, A. M. & Wells, G. L. (2024). Telling us Less Than What They Know: Expert inconclusive reports conceal exculpatory evidence in forensic cartridge-case comparisons. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 13, 147 - 152. https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000138

​

2023

​

Smith, A. M., Ying, R. C.*, Ayala, N. T.*, & Goldstein, A. R.* (2023). The untapped potential of lineups: Using eyewitness memory to rule out innocent suspects. Psychology, Crime, & Law. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2242998

 

Ying, R. C.*, Smith, A. M., & Wells, G. L. (2023). Lay (Mis)perceptions of Suspect-Identification Accuracy from Biased and Unbiased Lineups. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 29, 288-301. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000392

​

Witherby, A. E., Carpenter, S. K., & Smith, A. M. (2023). Exploring the relationship between prior knowledge and metacognitive monitoring accuracy. Metacognition and Learning.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09344-z

​

Yang, Y. & Smith, A. M. (2023). fullROC: An R package for generating and analyzing eyewitness-lineup ROC curves. Behavior Research Methods, 55, 1259 - 1274. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01807-6

​

Smith, A. M., Ayala, N. T.*, & Ying, R. C.* (2023). The rule out procedure: A signal-detection-informed approach to the collection of eyewitness identification evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 29(1), 19-31. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000373

​

Smith, A. M. & Wells, G. L. (2023). Using reflector variables to determine whether the culprit is present in or absent from a police lineup. In Scherr, K. & DeMatteo, D. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Psychology and Law. Oxford University Press.

​

2022

​

Smith, A. M., Smalarz, L., Wells, G. L., Lampinen, J. M., & Mackovichova, S.* (2022). Fair lineups improve outside observers' discriminability, not eyewitnesses' discriminability: Evidence for differential filler-siphoning using empirical data and the WITNESS computer-simulation architecture. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 11(4), 534 - 544.

https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000021

​

Ayala, N. T.*, Smith, A. M., & Ying, R. C.* (2022). The rule out procedure: Increasing the potential for police investigators to detect suspect innocence from eyewitness lineup procedures. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and  Cognition, 11(4), 489 - 499. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000018

​

2021

​

Smith, A. M., Smalarz, L., Ditchfield, R.*, & Ayala, N. T.* (2021). Evaluating the claim that high confidence implies high accuracy in eyewitness identification. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 27(4), 479–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000324

​

Smith, A. M. & Neal, T. M.S. (2021). The distinction between discriminability and reliability in forensic science. Science & Justice, 61(4), 319 - 331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2021.04.002

​

Smith, A. M. & Ayala, N. T.* (2021). Do traditional lineups undermine the capacity for eyewitness memory to rule out innocent suspects? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 10(2), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2021.03.003

​

Jalava, S. T.*, Smith, A. M., & Mackovichova, S*. (2021). Providing witnesses with an option to say "I'm not sure" neither improves classification performance nor the reliability of suspect identifications. Law and Human Behavior, 45(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000434

​

Smith, A. M., Toglia, M. P., & Lampinen, J. M. (2021). Methods, Measures, and Theories in Eyewitness Identification Tasks. Taylor & Francis.

​

Lampinen, J. M., Smith, A. M., & Toglia, M. P. (2021). Eyewitness memory: The next 40 years. In Smith, A. M., Toglia, M. P., & Lampinen, J. M. (Eds.), Methods, Measures, and Theories in Eyewitness Identification Tasks. Taylor and Francis.

​

Smith, A. M., Smalarz, L., & Jalava, S. T.* (2021). Measuring performance from eyewitness identification procedures. In Smith, A. M., Toglia, M. P., & Lampinen, J. M. (Eds.), Methods, Measures, and Theories in Eyewitness Identification Tasks. Taylor and Francis.

​

Toglia, M. P., Smith, A. M., & Lampinen, J. M. (2021). Toward the development of a more methodologically rigorous eyewitness science. In Smith, A. M., Toglia, M. P., & Lampinen, J. M. (Eds.), Methods, Measures, and Theories in Eyewitness Identification Tasks. Taylor and Francis.

​

2020

​

Smith, A. M. (2020). Why do mistaken identifications increase when either witnessing or testing conditions get worse? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 495-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.002

 

Smith, A. M., Yang, Y., & Wells, G. L. (2020). Distinguishing between investigator discriminability and eyewitness discriminability: A method for creating full Receiver Operating Characteristic curves of lineup identification procedures. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 589 – 607. doi: 10.1177/174569162-9-2426

​

Smith, A. M., Mackovichova, S.*, Jalava, S. T.*, & Pozzulo, J. (2020). High-similarity forensic-object lineups are superior to forensic-object showups. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9, 68 - 82. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.11.001

​

Lampinen, J. M., Race, B., Wolf, A. P., Phillips, P., & Smith, A. M. (2020). Comparing detailed and less detailed lineup instructions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 409 - 424. doi: 10.1002/acp.3627 

 

2019

​

Smith, A. M. & Leach, A.-M. (2019). Confidence can reliably discriminate between accurate and inaccurate lie decisions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 1062 - 1071. doi: 10.1177/1745691619863431.

​

Starns, J. J., Cataldo, A. M., Rotello, C. M.,…,Smith, A. M., et al. (2019). Assessing theoretical conclusions with blinded inference to investigate a potential inference crisis. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2, 335 - 349. doi: 10.1177/2515245919869583

​

Smith, A. M., Wilford, M., Quigley-McBride, A., & Wells, G. L. (2019). Mistaken identifications increase when either witnessing or testing conditions get worse. Law and Human Behavior, 43, 358 - 368. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000334

​

Smith, A. M., Lampinen, J. M., Wells, G. L., Smalarz, L., & Mackovichova, S.* (2019). Deviation from Perfect Performance measures the diagnostic utility of eyewitness lineups but partial Area Under the ROC Curve does not. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition.

 

Lampinen, J. M., Smith, A. M., & Wells, G. L. (2019). Four utilities in eyewitness identification practice: Dissociations between receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and expected utility analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 43, 26 – 44. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000309

​

2018

 

Smith, A. M., Wells, G. L., Smalarz, L., & Lampinen, J. M. (2018). Increasing the similarity of lineup fillers to the suspect improves applied value of lineups without improving memory performance. Psychological Science, 29,1548 – 1551. doi: 10.1177/0956797617698528

 

Smith, A. M., Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Myerson, T. (2018). Eyewitness identification performance on showups improves with an additional-opportunities instruction: Evidence for present-absent criteria discrepancy. Law and Human Behavior, 42, 215 – 226. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000284

​

2017

 

Lindsay, R. C. L., Bertrand, M., & Smith, A. M. (2017). The importance of knowing how a person became the suspect in a lineup: Multiple eyewitness identification procedures increase the risk of wrongful conviction. Manitoba Law Journal, 40, 53 – 83.

 

Eisen, M., Smith, A. M., Olaguez, A. P., & Skerritt-Perta, A. S. (2017). An examination of showups conducted by law enforcement using a field-simulation paradigm. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 23, 1 – 22. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/law0000115

 

Smith, A. M., Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Penrod, S. D. (2017). Fair lineups are better than biased lineups and showups, but not because they increase underlying discriminability. Law and Human Behavior, 41, 127 – 145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000219

​

2016

 

Smith, A. M., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (2016). A Bayesian analysis on the (dis)utility of  iterative-showup procedures: The moderating impact of prior probabilities. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 503-516. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000196

​

2015

 

Wells, G. L., Smith, A. M., & Smalarz, L. (2015). ROC analysis of lineups obscures information that is critical for both theoretical understanding and applied purposes. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 324 – 328. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.08.010

 

Wells, G. L., Smalarz, L., & Smith, A. M. (2015). ROC analysis of lineups does not measure underlying discriminability and has limited value. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 313 – 317. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.08.008

​

2014

 

Smith, A. M., Bertrand, M., Lindsay, R. C. L., Kalmet, N., Grossman, D., & Provenzano, D. (2014). The impact of multiple show-ups on eyewitness decision-making and innocence risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20, 247 – 259. doi:10.1037/xap00000183

 

Smith, A. M. & Dufraimont, L. (2014). Safeguards against wrongful conviction in eyewitness identification cases: Insights from empirical research. Canadian Criminal Law Review, 18, 199 – 218.

​

Smith, A. M., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Cutler, B. L. (2014). Eyewitness psychology in the context of international criminal law. In Bantekas, I. & Mylonnaki, E. (Eds.), Criminological Approaches to International Criminal Law. (pp. 159 – 191).Cambridge University Press.

 

Jochelson, R., Bertrand, M. I., Lindsay, R. C. L., Smith, A. M., Ventola, M. & Kalmet, N. (2014). Revisiting representativeness in the Manitoban criminal jury. Manitoba Law Journal: Underneath the Golden Boy, 37, 365 – 398.

​

2013

 

Smith, A. M., Leach, A.-M., & Cutler, B. L. (2013). Facilitating accuracy in showup identification procedures: The effect of the presence of stolen property on identification accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 216 - 221. doi: 10.1002/acp.2898

​

Smith, A. M., & Cutler, B. L. (2013). Identification procedures and wrongful conviction. In Cutler, B. L. (Ed.), Reform of Eyewitness Identification Procedures. (pp. 3 – 21). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

 

Smith, A. M. & Cutler, B. L. (2013). Identification test reforms. In Cutler, B. L. (Ed.), Reform of Eyewitness Identification Procedures. (pp. 203 – 219). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

​

2012

 

Smith, A. M., Cutler, B. L., & Findley, K. A. (2012). An investigation of top-down vs. bottom-up processing in post-appellate review of a criminal case. Albany Law Review, 74, 1365 – 1378.