References

Bhatt, S., and Brandon, S.E. (2008). Review of the preliminary credibility assessment screening system (PCASS). Unpublished manuscript, Washington, DC.

Bhatt, S., and Brandon, S.E. (2009). Review of voice stress-based technologies for the detection of deception. Unpublished manuscript, Washington, DC.

Brander, G. (2009). A U.K. perspective. Presentation at the Workshop on Field Evaluation of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences-Based Methods and Tools for Intelligence and Counterintelligence, September 22-23, National Academies, Washington, DC. Available: http://nationalacademies.org/bbcss/Field_Evaluation_Workshop_Presentations.html [accessed February 2010].

Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., and McEwen, T. (1996). Convicted by juries, exonerated by science. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Fisk, C. (1972). The Sino-Soviet border dispute: A comparison of the conventional and Bayesian methods for intelligence warning. Studies in Intelligence, 16(2), 53-62.

Grove, W.M., Zald, D.H., Hallberg, A.M., Lebow, B., Snitz, E., and Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19-30.

Heuer, R.J., Jr. (1999). Psychology of intelligence analysis. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency.

Innocence Project. (2009a). Innocence Project case profiles. Available: http://www.innocence project.org/know/ [accessed January 2010].

Innocence Project. (2009b). The causes of wrongful conviction. Available: http://www.innocence project.org/understand/ [accessed September 2009].

Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1994). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Lindsay, R.C.L., and Wells, G.L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identification from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 89
References Bhatt, S., and Brandon, S.E. (2008). Review of the preliminary credibility assessment screening system (PCASS). Unpublished manuscript, Washington, DC. Unpublished Bhatt, S., and Brandon, S.E. (2009). Review of voice stress-based technologies for the detection of deception. Unpublished manuscript, Washington, DC. Unpublished Brander, G. (2009). A U.K. perspective. Presentation at the Workshop on Field Evaluation of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences-Based Methods and Tools for Intelligence and Counterintelligence, September 22-23, National Academies, Washington, DC. Available: http://nationalacademies.org/bbcss/Field_Evaluation_Workshop_Presentations.html [accessed February 2010]. Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., and McEwen, T. (1996). Convicted by juries, exonerated by science. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Fisk, C. (1972). The Sino-Soviet border dispute: A comparison of the conventional and Bayes- ian methods for intelligence warning. Studies in Intelligence, (2), 53-62. Grove, W.M., Zald, D.H., Hallberg, A.M., Lebow, B., Snitz, E., and Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, , 19-30. Heuer, R.J., Jr. (1999). Psychology of intelligence analysis. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency. Innocence Project. (2009a). Innocence Project case profiles. Available: http://www.innocence project.org/know/ [accessed January 2010]. Innocence Project. (2009b). The causes of wrongful conviction. Available: http://www.innocence project.org/understand/ [accessed September 2009]. Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1994). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Lindsay, R.C.L., and Wells, G.L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identification from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 0, 556-564. 8

OCR for page 89
0 FIELD EVALUATION Lum, C., Kennedy, L.W., and Sherley, A.J. (2006). The effectiveness of counter-terrorism strategies: A Campbell systematic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, (4), 489-516. Lum, C., Koper, C., and Telep, C.W. (2009). Evidence-based policing matrix. Available: http://gemini.gmu.edu/cebcp/matrix.html [accessed January 2010]. Meissner, C.A. (2009). Eyewitness (mis)identification: How errors of memory can lead to wrongful conviction. Presented at the Actual Innocence Conference, Plano, Tx. Munsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand: Essays on psychology and crime. New York: Doubleday, Page. National Research Council. (1999). Improving student learning: A strategic plan for education research and its utilization. Committee on a Feasibility Study for a Strategic Education Research Program, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph. Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sci- ences and Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2008). Emerging cognitive neuroscience and related technologies. Committee on Military and Intelligence Methodology for Emergent Neurophysiologi - cal and Cognitive/Neural Science Research in the Next Two Decades. Standing Com - mittee for Technology Insight—Gauge, Evaluate, and Review Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Acad - emies Press. National Research Council. (2009). Opportunities in neuroscience for future army applications. Committee on Opportunities in Neuroscience for Future Army Applications. Board on Army Science and Technology, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. Wash - ington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2010). Strengthening scientific research and development at the Na- tional Institute of Justice. Committee on Assessing the Research Program of the National Institute of Justice. Center for Economic, Governance, and International Studies, Divi - sion of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Ruger, T., Kim, P., Martin, A., and Quinn, K. (2004). The Supreme Court Forecasting Project: Legal and political science approaches to Supreme Court decision making. Colum- bia Law Review, 0, 1150. Available: http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/truger/ workingpapers/104ColumLR1150.pdf [accessed January 2010]. Sherman, L.W. (1998). Evidence-based policing. Washington, DC: Police Foundation. Sticha, P., Buede, D., and Rees, R.L. (2005). APOLLO: An analytical tool for predicting a subject’s decision making. Presented at the International Conference on Intelligence Analysis Methods and Tools. May 2-6, McLean, VA. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (2003). Eyewitness evidence: A trainer’s manual for law enforcement. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Report of the Academic Competitiveness Council. Wash- ington, DC. Wells, G.L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R.S., Fulero, S.M., and Brimacombe, C.A.E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photo- spreads. Law and Human Behavior, (6), 603-647.