Literature DB >> 15796676

On the psychology of confessions: does innocence put innocents at risk?

Saul M Kassin1.   

Abstract

The Central Park jogger case and other recent exonerations highlight the problem of wrongful convictions, 15% to 25% of which have contained confessions in evidence. Recent research suggests that actual innocence does not protect people across a sequence of pivotal decisions: (a) In preinterrogation interviews, investigators commit false-positive errors, presuming innocent suspects guilty; (b) naively believing in the transparency of their innocence, innocent suspects waive their rights; (c) despite or because of their denials, innocent suspects elicit highly confrontational interrogations; (d) certain commonly used techniques lead suspects to confess to crimes they did not commit; and (e) police and others cannot distinguish between uncorroborated true and false confessions. It appears that innocence puts innocents at risk, that consideration should be given to reforming current practices, and that a policy of videotaping interrogations is a necessary means of protection. 2005 APA, all rights reserved

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15796676     DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.3.215

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Psychol        ISSN: 0003-066X


  7 in total

1.  Fuzzy-Trace Theory and Lifespan Cognitive Development.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; Valerie F Reyna
Journal:  Dev Rev       Date:  2015-12-01

2.  How downplaying or exaggerating crime severity in a confession affects perceived guilt.

Authors:  Glenys A Holt; Matthew A Palmer
Journal:  Psychiatr Psychol Law       Date:  2020-12-14

3.  Stressing the person: legal and everyday person attributions under stress.

Authors:  Jennifer T Kubota; Rachel Mojdehbakhsh; Candace Raio; Tobias Brosch; James S Uleman; Elizabeth A Phelps
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 3.251

4.  Neural correlates of anxiety under interrogation in guilt or innocence contexts.

Authors:  Sole Yoo; Hanseul H Choi; Hae-Yoon Choi; Sungjae Yun; Haeil Park; Hyunseok Bahng; Hyunki Hong; Heesong Kim; Hae-Jeong Park
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Can a Robot Catch You Lying? A Machine Learning System to Detect Lies During Interactions.

Authors:  Jonas Gonzalez-Billandon; Alexander M Aroyo; Alessia Tonelli; Dario Pasquali; Alessandra Sciutti; Monica Gori; Giulio Sandini; Francesco Rea
Journal:  Front Robot AI       Date:  2019-07-31

6.  Interviewing Suspects in Denial: On How Different Evidence Disclosure Modes Affect the Elicitation of New Critical Information.

Authors:  Lennart May; Pär Anders Granhag; Serra Tekin
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-07-17

7.  T-Pattern Analysis and Cognitive Load Manipulation to Detect Low-Stake Lies: An Exploratory Study.

Authors:  Barbara Diana; Valentino Zurloni; Massimiliano Elia; Cesare Cavalera; Olivia Realdon; Gudberg K Jonsson; M Teresa Anguera
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-03-02
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.