Article navigation
Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine Clark et al.’s (2013) claim that, contrary to the white paper produced by the American Psychological Association (Wells et al., 1998), the match-to-description method of choosing foils is inferior to the similarity-to-suspect method.

Design/methodology/approach

Examining the existing empirical evidence.

Findings

There is no difference between the two methods in rate of identifications. Sometimes, however, the rate of false identifications is larger when the similarity-to-suspect method is used.

Practical implications

The white paper’s recommendation should remain in place.

Originality/value

Keeping the white paper’s recommendation is important to prevent false identifications.

Licensed re-use rights only
You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Pay-Per-View Access
$39.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close subscription notice
Close access options