High functioning autism spectrum disorders: an investigation of psychological vulnerabilities during interrogative interview

Abstract

Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists are commonly asked to ascertain the reliability of statements made by suspects to the police during questioning and to assess an individual's vulnerability to providing information which is inaccurate, unreliable, and misleading during police interview. Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are characterised by qualitative impairments in social communication and interaction, and a restricted or repetitive pattern of behaviours, interests, and activities. It is not clear whether people with ASD are more vulnerable at interview, or more prone to respond negatively to interrogative pressure, when compared with the general population. In the present study, 26 individuals with high functioning ASD, and 27 gender-and IQ-matched controls, were compared on measures of interrogative suggestibility and compliance as well as on measures of anxiety, depression, the extent to which they feared negative evaluation by others, and whether they had a suspicious outlook. There were no significant between-group differences on the measures of suggestibility, but the group with ASD were rated as significantly more compliant than the controls in terms of both parental and self-report, and also had higher scores on measures of depression, anxiety, fear of negative social evaluation and paranoia. Bi-modal distribution of suggestibility scores within the ASD group indicates that individual characteristics should be taken into account when considering an assessment. Individuals with ASD may be more eager to please or to avoid conflict and confrontation than controls, and may be more prone to respond compliantly to requests and demands.

A Systematic Review of People with Autism Spectrum Disorder and the Criminal Justice System

“…While there were some positive accounts of helpful lawyers and/or police, many of the participants found the CJS frightening, stressful and confusing; they felt their Asperger syndrome had often not been understood or taken into account; and they wanted someone to explain to them what was going on. One other study (21, by North, Russell & Gudjonsson, 2008) examined other possible vulnerabilities in people with ASD compared to those without ASD.…”

Recall of a live and personally experienced eyewitness event by adults with autism spectrum disorder

“…Both groups showed a self-enactment effect across both interview phases, recalling more actions that they had performed themselves than actions that the experimenter had performed. However, the ASD group were more likely than their typical comparisons to confuse the source of self- , and some report they make more errors or are less accurate (Maras & Bowler, 2011, but see Bruck et al, 2007Maras & Bowler, 2010, McCrory et al, 2007North et al, 2008).…”

“…Both groups showed a self-enactment effect across both interview phases, recalling more actions that they had performed themselves than actions that the experimenter had performed. However, the ASD group were more likely than their typical comparisons to confuse the source of self- , and some report they make more errors or are less accurate (Maras & Bowler, 2011, but see Bruck et al, 2007Maras & Bowler, 2010, McCrory et al, 2007North et al, 2008).Two studies to date have explored eyewitness testimony by children with ASD using a live event, although the event in these was passively observed rather than enacted. McCrory et al (2007) used a live classroom event and reported that whilst children with ASD freely recalled around a third less information than typically developing children did, they were no less accurate with regards to the proportion of errors or incorrect details that they reported.…”

“…errors or are less accurate (Maras & Bowler, 2011, but see Bruck et al, 2007;Maras & Bowler, 2010, McCrory et al, 2007North et al, 2008).…”

Eyewitness Testimony in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Review

“…In the third study to assess suggestibility in ASD, North, Russell and Gudjonsson (2008) used the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (Gudjonsson, 1997) that the ASD group scored higher on a compliance questionnaire than their matched comparison participants, which indicates an increased tendency to accede to propositions put forward by another person, even though privately they disagree with them. This finding of increased compliance in ASD is important because it suggests that in forensic interviewing contexts witnesses or suspects with ASD might be more prone than typical individuals to respond compliantly to the requests and demands of the interviewer, even if they do not actually hold this information as being true.…”