What are false confessions?
- general definition (Kassin et al., 2010)
- Research Definition
= admission to a criminal act—usually accompanied by a narrative of how and why the crime occurred—that the confessor did not commit
A confession is deemed false, when:
- It is later discovered that no crime was committed.
- Additional evidence shows, it was physically impossible for the confessor to have committed the crime.
- The real perpetrator, having no connection to the defendant, is apprehended and linked to the crime.
- Scientific evidence affirmatively establishes the confessor’s innocence.
–> in 25% of the Innocence Projects exoneration cases false confessions were involved (68% for murder cases)(Appleby & Kassin)
(little less in Kassin et al.: 15-20%)
What are the different types of false confessions?
- voluntary false confession
- compliant false confession
- internalized false confession
(explain them!)
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Gender
- men are more probable to false confess than women (might be due to societal expectations)
Kassin et al. 2010
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Adolescence/Immaturity
- over-represented –> Example: the Central Park 5
- massive meta-analysis of different surveys about prevalence in different countries (23.000 juveniles)
11.5% (2,726) ever interrogated by police
14% reported having given a false confession
–> adolescences have still a lot of the psychological characteristics which make you more prone to falsely confess, which becomes less with older age and maturation of the brain …like…
- impulsivity, reward orientation, risk taking, less emotional regulation = heighted arousability, less planning and self-control , suggestibility
- Also: less understanding of the legal implications and more easily intimidated by authority
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Cognitive and Intellectual Disability
Intellectual Disability = IQ < 70
- overrepresentation!!
- impairments: adapting to societal norms, communication, social and interpersonal skills, and self-direction, MEMORY
- more easily influenced by leading questions and authority –> suggestibility (Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale)
- inability to understand Miranda warning, their rights or sometimes the repercussions of a confession
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Psychopathology - Antisocial Personality Disorder
- overrepresented in prison population in general
- make both false denials and false confessions more often
- more concentrated on short-term gains –> low impulse control
- might have a pathological desire for notoriety
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Other Psychopathology
- people with metal illness also overrepresented
- Example: Depression, Anxiety, PTSD
- mental illnesses often accompanied by faulty reality monitoring, distorted perception, impaired judgment, anxiety, mood disturbance, poor self-control, feelings of guilt
- -> more vulnerable to situational factors
- in the majority of offender’s mental illnesses co-occur with substance abuse = big risk factor for violent offending!!
Gudjonsson, 2002:
- 23 British murder cases where convictions were quashed ➔Fourteen cases (61%) fall under the heading of psychological vulnerability
- evidence about psychological vulnerability was heard in 86% of the cases on appeal vs. 22% in original trial
- Psychological vulnerabilities:
➔ low intelligence (not yet ID), combined with high suggestibility and compliance
➔ diagnosis of personality disorder
➔ clinical depression
➔ memory distrust syndrome
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Psychopathology - ADHD
- common among offenders = highly overrepresented
- -> around 20-25% of prison population but only 4% in general population
- very bad impulse control
- often inattentive (duh!) towards police or Miranda warnings
- high compliance
case study by Gudjonsson & Young (2006):
- 15-year old was suspect in a murder trial, was convicted
- unawareness that he had ADHD
- when this was found out he was given a new trial and his conviction was overturned
- the defense argued in the first trial that he had poor intellectual functioning (IQ=63), attentional problems and distractibility and therefore not very fit to testify
BUT was dismissed by the judge
new assessment: - determined that he had ADHD
–> significantly impaired his capacity to participate effectively in trial - ADHD affected his IQ scores (making it look as if he suffering from mental retardation) but masking his other more relevant vulnerabilities
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Innocence
= prerequisite
Presumption of guilt (through mistakes pre interrogation)
Illusion of transparency and just world belief
Because/Despite of denials –> elicit highly confrontational interrogations
Techniques are design to put suspect under high psychological pressure –> leads to false confession of innocent people
–> especially: minimization, confrontation and isolation
Belief of police of ability to distinguish (54% accuracy in telling truth from lie = really bad in distinguishing)
- Illusion of transparency =a tendency for people to overestimate the extent to which their true thoughts, emotions, and other inner states can be seen by others
- cooperate fully and wave their rights
What are risk factors for false confessions?
A) Personal/ Dispositional
Common Factors
o Impulsive problem-solving strategy
People try to maximize well-being in current situation
People often prefer immediate outcomes over delayed ones
For e.g., when sleep-deprived
o Tendency to Compliance & Suggestibility, low self-esteem –> Vulnerability to influence
Tendency to Compliance can be a risk factor, but also an outcome of vulnerability to influence
–> see Kassin (1996)
- conformity, obedience and compliance can be very powerful
Cognitive-Behavioural Model of Confession:
1) social factors (isolation…)
2) emotional factors (anxiety…)
3) cognitive factors
4) situational factors
5) physiological factors (stress tolerance)
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
=
= can be mostly controlled by applying fair interviewing strategies and fair treatment of the suspect by the police
What is the REID Technique?
- interrogation technique from the US from the 50s
- supposed to create high pressure on the suspect to gain a confession
- still routinely used in Canada and US
- 2 phases: 1st interview (non-accusatory), 2nd 9-step interrogation
- in devised of 9 steps:
1) initial confrontation
2) developing a theme -> e.g. trying to shift the blame away from the suspect = form of minimization
3) get less denials -> e.g. ignore them = form of maximization
4) suspect will offer other explanation = objections –> over come them!
5) reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive –> regain attention
6) over come passive mood, use the emotionality and offer alternatives why the suspect did it (be “sympathetic”)
7) alternative questions –> arrive at choice between two alternatives (one more socially acceptable)
8) lead suspect verbalize the admission of guilt (ideally in front of others)
9) get the written confession
other guidelines:
- interrogator appears highly confident
- plain room, straight chair
Criticism:
- to high rate of false confessions especially among juveniles and mentally impaired
- assumption of guilt + goal to get a confession
- also guilty strong willed suspect just stop talking
What are the Miranda Rights?
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.”
- you do not have to talk to the police
- you do not have to incriminate yourself
- if you do so it will be used against you
- you have the right to an attorney/legal representation
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
Sleep Deprivation
- Consequences of sleep deprivation:
o Disrupting mood
o Impairing decision making
o Reduces inhibitory control, more impulsive!!
o Interferes with ability to anticipate/measure consequences
o False and distorted memories of past events –>
heightened suggestibility
=> vulnerable to false confession - 17% of interrogations during sleeping hours
- majority of interrogations lasts more than 12h, some more than 24h
- if it exceeds 6 hours = ‘‘coercive’
Sleep Deprivation - Frenda et al.
Aim
Method
Results
Limitation
- determine the effect of sleep deprivation on false confession rate
- experimental design
- 88 participants which were assigned to two groups:
1) sleep deprived
2) control - “Escape key” task on a computer
- 50% of sleep deprived and 20% of control group falsely confessed
- very sleepy people are 4.5 times more like to falsely confess
- don’t know about true confessions maybe also higher
- very different to real life scenario –> much lower cost in the lab
- are their any moderators: age, gender, etc.
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
Physical custody and isolation
- strategies begin from the moment that you are arrested
- made as uncomfortable as possible: no shower, its cold, sleep deprivation etc. –> heightens psychological and physical distress
- isolation heightens the distress
- police officers in the interrogation are often the only ones the suspect gets to talk to –> more inclined to keep talking and cooperate more
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
Trickery/Deception: Presentation of false evidence
- in some countries like the U.S. is permissible to lie to the suspect and provide false evidence to get a confession
- the false evidence can be “provided” by a comrade, witness etc.
- false evidence can change the suspects memory, believes, perception etc.
- -> leading to a internalized false confession
- communicated that resistance is useless and the outcome (conviction) is inevitable anyway, making the suspect more hopeless
- -> leading to a compliant false confession
- Polygraph-induced false confessions: the “failure” of a polygraph test is used to pressure suspects into (false) confession
–> see Kassin, 1996
Kassin, S. M., & Kiechel, K. L. (1996). The social psychology of false confessions:
compliance, internalization, and confabulation.
Aim
Method
Result
Limitation
- demonstrates that false incriminating evidence can lead people to falsely confess
- 79 participants (students)
- pp + confederate in one session
- pp was ask to type out words on a computer but not press the “ALT” key in order to not destroy the data
- at one point the computer crashed (and the confederate snitched = false accusation)
- independent variable:
o Vulnerability: fast or slow typing
o False incriminating evidence: false witness condition + no witness condition - dependent variable:
- compliance
- internalization
- confabulation
- 69% of the 75 subjects signed the confession = complied
- 28% exhibited internalization
- 9% confabulated details to support their false beliefs
- not such a high stakes situation like in real life
- could have actually pressed the “ALT” key by accident
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
Tactics: Minimization
= minimize the crime through ‘‘theme development’’ –> give face saving excuse or moral justification
- saying that actions were spontaneous, accidental, provoked, peer-pressured, drug-induced etc.
- imply! lenience if confession:
> reinforcement: immediate better outcome
> pragmatic implication (not promised)
–> less prison time etc. = high-end induced
- part of the REID technique (step 2), ergo often used
What are risk factors for false confessions?
B) Situational Risk factors
Tactics: Maximization
= involves cluster of scare tactics designed to intimidate suspects:
confronting with accusations of guilt, refusing to accept denials, exaggerating seriousness, presenting fabricated evidence
- designed to convey the interrogator’s rock-solid belief of suspect’s guilty and that all denials will fail
- part of the REID technique (step 3), ergo used often
Russano, M. B., Meissner, C. A., Narchet, F. M., & Kassin, S. M. (2005). Investigating true and false confessions within a novel experimental paradigm.
(minimization)
Aim
Method
Results
Limitation
1st aim: see effect of certain interrogation techniques on true and false confession rates (diagnosticity)
2nd aim: test new paradigm
old paradigm:
- only innocent suspect = unrealistic + could not tell us about diagnosticity
new paradigm = Cheating paradigm:
- pps paired with a confederate
- were suposed to work one task alone
- in the guilty condition: confederate asks for help
- then accused of cheating in the experiment
• between-subjects factorial 2x2x2 design
• pps (330) randomly assigned to (innocent vs. guilty); (minimization vs. no minimization); (deal vs. no deal)
• experimenter was blind to pp’s guilt/innocence
• pp’s decision followed by debriefing (probing for suspicion), asked rate pressure to sign the confession (0-10)
- no tactics: true 46%; false 6%
- deal: 72%; 14%
- minimization: 81%; 18%
- deal + minimization: 87%; 43%
- -> the more tactics the lower the diagnosticity
- with the exception of innocents who experienced minimization, participants did not report feeling more pressure to confess when the techniques were used
- did not test maximization
King, L., & Snook, B. (2009). Peering inside a Canadian interrogation room an examination of the Reid model of interrogation, influence tactics, and coercive strategies. (field study)
Aim
Method
Results
Limitations
- many research questions: main = shed light on diagnosticity and usage of REID technique
- 44 video recorded interrogations from Canada
- coded them according to:
1. Demographic/ background variables –characteristic of the interrogation length, date) and the primary and secondary interrogators, the suspect, the victim and the crime
2. Suspect behaviours -suspect’s behaviour during the interrogation (e.g., number of denials, number of objections, whether the individual withdraws from the interrogation).
3. (9) Reid steps - Reid steps were coded; interrogation themes were also coded
4. Reid guidelines –> improve the likelihood of obtaining a confession?
5. Influence tactics present? (Leo, 1996)
6. Coercive strategies present? (Leo, 1996) - interrogators used about 34% of the Reid model, not everything and every step! (different reasons: time constrains, personal preference, not enough training)
- proportion of core Reid components used was related to interrogation outcome
- same for coercive and other influence strategies - more minimization, less maximization
- no demographic differences in this study
- small sample
- self selection of the video-tape –> may raise concern (would probably not choose the most coercive)
Kassin, S. M., Kukucka, J., Lawson, V. Z., & DeCarlo, J. (2014). Does video recording alter the behavior of police during interrogation? A mock crime-and-investigation study.
Aim
Method
Result
Limitations
- see whether recording of interrogations will alter process of interrogations (e.g. inhibiting the of harsh tactics)
- 62 investigators form police stations
- inspected a staged crime scene (theft of cash from a briefcase) and interrogate a mock suspect, but did not know
- 2x2 design: suspect was either innocent or guilty (random); investigators were aware of video recording or not
- used following interrogation techniques: bluff, minimisation, rapport building, false evidence, offers of leniency, threats of future consequences
- aware officers were less likely to use maximization and minimization BUT confrontation and presentation of false evidence unaffected
- aware officers were more diagnostic about guilt and innocence
- -> video recording does have a positive effect on decreasing “dangerous” tactics and improve accuracy
- was just a mock crime so no one was really “guilty”
- was an experiment so maybe behaved different then in real life situation
Medford, S., Gudjonsson, G. H., & Pearse, J. (2003). The efficacy of the appropriate adult safeguard during police interviewing
Aim Results Method Limitation Problem with AA
- examine the efficacy of the appropriate adult (AA) safeguard for vulnerable suspects during the police interview
- interview audio-recordings were coded and analysed
- 500 interviews with psychologically vulnerable adults or juveniles conducted by the London Metropolitan Police
- AAs were sometimes present (majority of juvenile cases), sometimes not
- especially for juveniles mostly family members and friends = AA
- family or friends intervened more (appropriately and inappropriately) vs. social workers and volunteers
effect of AA present: - no more admissions
- decisive effect on the behaviour of the police (more fair and considered, less interrupting and confrontational)
- more often legal representation present and more active role
- officers interviewing adult suspects with AA scored most highly on interview competence
- self-selection and not randomly assigned
Problem with AAs:
- no clear requirements or education necessary
- AAs not always behave on the best interest of the suspect
- AA make inappropriate contributions and are relative inactive
