No abstract

The results indicate the importance of shame, dissociation and psychopathology in disclosure and support the need for immigration procedures sensitive to these issues. Judgments that late disclosure is indicative of a fabricated asylum claim must take into account the possibility of factors related to sexual violence and the circumstances of the interview process itself.

When someone flees their country and seeks the protection of another state, they usually have to describe what happened to make them afraid to return. This task requires many psychological processes, a key one being autobiographical memory. Memory for events of a specific time and place in one's personal past is the subject of a huge literature, much of it showing that recall is vulnerable to distortions and biases. We review selected areas of this literature, shedding light on some of the processes at work when someone seeks to be recognised as a refugee-in particular, the effects of emotion, including emotional disorder. We then turn to the differing types of memory styles seen in different cultures. Crucial to this area, we briefly examine the current literature on deception. Finally, we draw on the reviewed literature to present conclusions about the reliance on autobiographical memories in the asylum process. The asylum processAsylum processes differ across countries, but the basic procedure, as it operates in the West, is the same-offering an account (i.e. making a claim), a first decision (often by the state) and an appeal process. Using the UK as an example, the first step in claiming asylum is to give basic details and an explanation as to how the individual believes

In order to claim recognition as a refugee, individuals must give a 'plausible' account of persecution. Decision makers must then decide on the truthfulness of the account, and whether the person fits the legal definition of a refugee. Decision makers often have little corroborating evidence, and must make an assessment of credibility, largely a subjective response, involving a reliance on assumptions about human behaviour, judgements, attitudes, and how a truthful account is presented. This article describes a study of the assumptions in judgments made by UK immigration judges. Assumptions were defined and a coding structure used to systematically extract a list of assumptions from a series of written determinations. These assumptions were then submitted to an inductive thematic analysis. The resulting themes are compared briefly to the psychological and psychiatric literature, raising the question of whether assumptions used in asylum decision making are in line with current empirical evidence about human behaviour. The article recommends cross-disciplinary research to build an evidence base in order to help inform the decision making process in this crucial area of law.

Decisions on refugee status rely heavily on judgments about how individuals present themselves and their histories. Late or non-disclosure of sensitive personal information, for example, may be assumed to be a result of fabrication by the asylum claimant. However, if incorrect, such assumptions can lead to genuine refugees in need of protection being refused asylum. A study employing semi-structured interviews with 27 refugees and asylum-seekers with traumatic histories was conducted to explore the factors involved in the disclosure of sensitive personal information during Home Office interviews in the UK. Many reported difficulties with disclosing personal details, and interviewer qualities emerged as the strongest factor in either facilitating or impeding disclosure. The interview data showed that disclosure was not just based on personal decisions and internal processes, but was also related to interpersonal, situational and contextual factors. Recommendations for improving Home Office procedures are also discussed.

Claims for asylum entail many complex psychological interactions. The claimant presents his or her claim, interviews are conducted, appeals heard and decisions made. In other areas of law, civil or criminal law, for example, there is a wealth of studies exploring the interface with psychology and examining the processes at work in legal proceedings. However, to date, very little of this has been applied to refugee law. This article reviews areas of the psychological literature which have models or knowledge to offer that may be pertinent to the proceedings of refugee law. The review is tentative, in that cross-disciplinary research is needed to establish the extent to which these areas of psychology do apply. Studies similar to those seen in other areas of psychology and law are necessary to establish the degree to which similar conclusions may be drawn, and the degree to which there are distinct psychological issues at work in the process of refugee status decision making.

No abstract

Memory difficulties following traumatic experiences have been found to result in testimonial inconsistencies, which can affect credibility judgements in asylum decisions. No investigations have looked into how/whether the behavioural sequelae of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) affect decisions. This study aimed to investigate this by looking at whether observable symptoms of PTSD can be confused with perceived cues to deception. An actor performed four versions of a fictional 'asylum interview' that contained differing levels of pre-defined 'deception' and 'trauma' behaviours. Four groups of students (total n = 118) each watched a different interview. They gave subjective ratings of credibility, plus quantitative and qualitative information about the factors that influenced their judgements. Despite the content of the interviews remaining the same, significant differences in credibility ratings were found between interviews; with the interview containing both 'trauma' and 'deception' behaviours being rated as significantly less credible than the interview containing only the PTSD behaviours. 'Emotional congruence' was conceptualised as an important factor in influencing credibility. Results are discussed in terms of possible heuristics involved in judgements of an asylum-seeker population, as well as implications for vulnerable asylum seekers whose symptoms do not conform to stereotypes. Limitations and avenues for future research are highlighted.