Inaccurate Eyewitness Testimony

In society it is substantially common for people to be exonerated for a crime they did not commit. Unfortunately it is even more common for that to happen when they are incarcerated due to inaccurate eyewitness testimonies. Eyewitness research has demonstrated that there are a multitude of ways to conduct identification processes, however, the processes that police often use today are more likely to encourage inaccurate identification. In addition there have been many case studies of exonerated people that show the downfalls of eyewitness testimony. Wrongful incarceration has consistently demonstrated that inaccurate identification carries a big weight when it comes to wrongful identification, in fact, in the article Contamination of Eyewitness Self-Reports and Mistaken-Identification Problem by Laura Smalarz and Gary L. Wells, they state that there is an average of thirty three percent of witnesses who make an identification from a lineup identify a known innocent filler. There is a lot of thought behind the processes of identification but there are so many variables that can taint a subject’s confidence.
In fact, even when testing solutions it in a lab it is far from reality in an actual lineup. Smalarz
The ‘illusion of truth’ problem is mainly due to the misinterpreting of memory which could be because of source confusion. The manipulation of stimulus presentation designed to make perceiving easier leads to processing fluency, then once a stimulus registered as special it will attribute fluency to a specific prior event and therefore will create false familiarity. Post identification feedback gives witnesses that have scarce access to clear memory an external cue to how they are answering questions, unlike accurate eyewitness who have stronger access to an internal cue that analyzes an sense of recognition which is different from