Creating a cross-race effect inventory to postdict eyewitness accuracy.
Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study
Non-randomized experimental laboratory study with scale validation
PubMed 40720315 · doi:10.1037/lhb0000609
What was done
Participants (White and Asian individuals) completed four mock-crime trials featuring two White and two Asian targets. Each trial involved viewing a mock-crime video, completing a distractor task, making a sequential lineup decision (target present or absent), and indicating confidence in their decision. Following all trials, participants completed candidate self-report items for the novel Cross-Race Effect Inventory (CRE-I). The authors used exploratory factor analysis to evaluate subscales and assessed whether these subscales predicted identification accuracy.
What was found
The abstract reports no exact numerical data, sample sizes, or test statistics. Qualitatively, a cross-race effect was observed for White participants but not for Asian participants. Exploratory factor analysis produced internally reliable CRE-I scales for White eyewitnesses (General Face Recognition Ability, Race-Specific Face Recognition Ability, Racial Attitudes, Quantity of Contact, Quality of Contact, Motivated Individuation, and Cognitive Disregard). Three scales predicted identification accuracy beyond confidence ratings: Race-Specific Face Recognition Ability, Racial Attitudes Toward White People, and Motivated Individuation of White People.
Why it matters
This study provides an integrative self-report measure uniting perceptual and social-cognitive predictors of the cross-race effect, offering a potential tool to help evaluate eyewitness reliability in legal contexts.
Limits
The abstract reports no sample size or numerical effect estimates (such as odds ratios, regression coefficients, or confidence intervals). The inventory was only established and validated for White eyewitnesses because the cross-race effect was not detected in Asian participants, limiting generalizability. Furthermore, the laboratory mock-crime paradigm may not fully reflect real-world eyewitness conditions.