The criminal justice system has devised several procedural safeguards to protect defendants from erroneous conviction resulting from mistaken eyewitness identification. Mistaken Identification: The Eyewitness, Psychology, and the Law reviews the empirical research bearing on the adequacy of those safeguards. After summarizing the research on the accuracy of eyewitness identification, the authors examine diverse factors that influence identification accuracy and review recent research on the effectiveness of commonly used safeguards. This body of literature converges on the conclusion that traditional safeguards such as presence of counsel at lineups, cross-examination, and judges' instructions are ineffective against mistaken eyewitness identification. Expert psychological testimony on eyewitness memory, designed to educate the jury about how memory processes work and how eyewitness testimony should be evaluated, shows much greater promise of protection against mistaken identifications and erroneous convictions. Mistaken Identification is an invaluable text for advanced psychology students, law students, and researchers of memory.

1. Eyewitness identification errors; 2. The admissibility of expert testimony on the psychology of eyewitness identification; 3. Eyewitness experts in the courts of appeal; 4. The scientific psychology of eyewitness identifications; 5. Summarizing eyewitness research findings; 6. Factors that influence eyewitness memory: witness factors; 7. Factors that influence eyewitness memory: perpetrator and event factors; 8. The effects of suggestive identification procedures on identification accuracy; 9. Legal representation at identification procedures; 10. Attorney sensitivity to factors influencing eyewitness reliability; 11. Surveying lay knowledge about sources of eyewitness unreliability; 12. The ability of jurors to differentiate accurate from inaccurate eyewitnesses; 13. Jury sensitivity to factors that influence eyewitness reliability; 14. Expert testimony and its possible impacts on the jury; 15. Improving juror knowledge, integration and decision making; 16. Court-appointed and opposing experts: better alternatives?; 17. Instructing the jury about problems of mistaken identification.