Commentary: overcoming judicial preferences for person- versus situation-based analyses of interrogation-induced confessions.
The vast majority of false confessions occur in the context of interrogation, and in response to the sources of distress and persuasive tactics of the interrogation. However, there are widely held mistaken assumptions that a false confessor must suffer some personal defect such as a mental disorder. In this article, we explain that many normal people may give false confessions under certain social situations. We examine such situations and their effects on false confessions. We urge courts to recognize that suspect-enhanced vulnerabilities are not a necessary condition for the elicitation of false confessions, but rather that much lesser situational factors have just as much influence on the interrogated. We lay out a set of guidelines to assist expert testifiers in evaluating better an interrogation-induced confession.
Davis
Deborah
D
Psychology Department/296 University of Nevada Reno, NV 89557, USA. debdavis@unr.edu
Leo
Richard A
RA
D000987:Antisocial Personality Disorder / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D001318:Authoritarianism; D001883:Borderline Personality Disorder / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D008192:Deception; D003674:Defense Mechanisms; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005201:Fantasy; D006708:Homicide / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000523:psychology; D006801:Humans; D007389:Internal-External Control; D008297:Male; D010554:Personality Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D010565:Persuasive Communication; D011329:Prisoners / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000523:psychology; D012926:Social Control, Formal; D014342:Truth Disclosure