{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01892744479495268, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.848920863309353, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of Constructing Identi-Kit Composites on Photospread Identification Performance

Previous research has found some forms of post-event activity, such as working with a sketch artist or viewing mugshots, to negatively affect the subsequent identification performance of an eyewitness. The present experiment examined potential carryover effects of forming an Identi-kit composite and writing a verbal description on the identification of an assailant from a photoarray. Both interventions were compared to a no-treatment (control) condition. Forming an Identi-kit composite increased witness sensitivity, causing subjects to be less likely to select any photo. In contrast, writing a description increased the likelihood that subjects identified the photo of the assailant. Neither intervention affected the likelihood of misidentification. Alternative theoretical explanations for the results and implications for field procedures are explored.