Effects of personality, interrogation techniques and plausibility in an experimental false confession paradigm

Abstract

Purpose. The goal of the present study was to investigate the effects of personality variables, interrogation techniques and the plausibility level of an alleged transgression on the experimental elicitation of false confessions. Methods. Two hundred and nineteen undergraduate students assessed on measures of compliance, self‐esteem, locus of control and interrogative suggestibility participated in the Kassin and Kiechel (1996) paradigm. Experimental manipulations included minimization and maximization interrogation techniques and high and low plausibility of the alleged typing mistake to examine rates of false confession and internalization. Results. The overall false confession and internalization rates across all conditions were 43 and 10%, respectively. An increased likelihood of false confession behaviour was associated with higher Shift scores on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale, the use of minimization interrogation techniques and an increase in the plausibility of the allegation. Females were more likely to falsely confess than males in the high plausibility condition, whereas Caucasian and Asian participants were equally likely to falsely confess. Personality variables, such as compliance, most influenced the behaviour of males and Asians. Conclusions. The results of this study offer insight into false confession behaviour, suggesting that individuals who have a tendency to change their responses in the face of negative feedback may be more prone to false confession behaviour. The findings also serve to highlight the dangers of using minimization interrogation techniques and elucidate the limited generalizability of the paradigm to situations in which the alleged transgression is less plausible.

Effects of false‐evidence ploys and expert testimony on jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of confession evidence

“…The present study allowed jurors to decide the suspect's guilt, and we did not provide ground truth to participants, but many experimental and archival studies suggest that false-evidence ploys increase the likelihood of false confessions (Forrest et al, 2002Gudjonsson, 2003;Horselenberg et al, 2003;Kassin & Kiechel, 1996;Klaver et al, 2008;Leo & Ofshe, 1998;Ofshe & Leo, 1997a). Despite the larger potential for false confessions in the presence of ploys, jurors were only marginally less likely to convict a defendant who confessed after a false-evidence ploy.…”

“…Participants may have the same overconfidence in officers' behavioral analysis skills as the police have in themselves (Kassin, 2008b;Kassin & Fong, 1999;Kassin et al, 2005;Vrij et al, 2006). Second, jurors may perceive demeanor ploys as less plausible to the defendant (see Klaver, Lee, & Rose, 2008) and therefore as less likely to induce a false confession. Third, due to the extensive scientific investigative techniques present in contemporary television crime dramas, participants may view scientific and testimonial evidence as nearly irrefutable and therefore more powerful than a demeanor ploy.…”

Behind the Confession: Relating False Confession, Interrogative Compliance, Personality Traits, and Psychopathy

“…As predicted, participants of Asian ethnicity also scored significantly higher on interrogative compliance than participants of African-American origin. Caucasian and Asian participants did not significantly differ in interrogative compliance scores, unlike Klaver et al (2008). However, the results from the hierarchical regression analyses indicated that ethnicity was not a significant predictor of compliance.…”

“…Ethnicity and age have also been shown to be related to interrogative compliance. People of Asian origin are reportedly more compliant in an interrogative setting than Caucasians, though both ethnicities have similar false confession rates (Klaver et al, 2008). Younger people are also more likely to falsely confess (13 to 18 years old; Goldstein et al, 2003) and have higher compliance (13 to 16 years old ;Redlich & Goodman, 2003) than those who are older.…”

Guilty While Innocent: A Review on False Confession Phenomenon in the Criminal Justice System

“…Farklı yaş gruplarıyla yürütülen birçok deneyde belirli koşullar altında genellikle katılımcıların çoğunun, bazen ise tamamının sahte itirafta bulunabildiği gözlenmektedir (örn., Forrest, Wadkins ve Larson, 2006;Horselenberg ve ark., 2003Horselenberg ve ark., , 2006Kassin ve Kiechel, 1996;Klaver, Lee ve Rose, 2008;Perillo ve Kassin, 2011;Redlich ve Goodman, 2003). www.nesnedergisi.com Görüldüğü gibi, sahte itiraf olgusu, özellikle ağır suç davalarında, sanılanın aksine son derece yaygın bir olgudur.…”