SELFPERCEIVED LIKELIHOOD OF FALSE CONFESSION A COMPARISON OF

SELF-PERCEIVED LIKELIHOOD OF FALSE CONFESSION: A COMPARISON OF JUVENILE AND ADULT OFFENDERS Emily Haney-Caron, M. S. , Elizabeth Gale-Bentz, B. A. , Sharon Kelley, J. D. , Ph. D. , Leah Brogan, M. S. , & Naomi Goldstein, Ph. D. 2015 American Psychology-Law Society Conference

The Problem of False Confession 16% of DNA exonorees falsely confessed to crime (Garrett, 2008) q Police investigators estimate 5% of innocent suspects falsely confess during interrogation (Kassin et al. , 2007) q Confessions increase likelihood of conviction (Kassin & Wrightsman, 1980) q

Belief in evidence indicating guilt Belief leniency will result Mental Illness Risk Factors for False Confession Intellectual disability Young age Suggestive interviewin g techniques

Correlates of False Confession Among Juveniles Poor Miranda comprehensi on Use of police or parental pressure Suggestibilit y Immature decisionmaking abilities Young age Impulsiven ess Low IQ Desire to comply with authority Failure to consider long-term consequen ces

Methods: Participants Juveniles Adults � Pre- and post-adjudication � Post-sentencing adults in adolescents at sites in PA & Philadelphia Prison System MA � 39 men, 53 women � 125 boys, 43 girls � Ages 21 - to 65 -years-old � Ages 12 - to 19 -years-old (M = 36. 23; SD = 9. 80) (M = 15 -91; SD = 1. 69)African American Caucasian Hispanic Asian American Other, including bi-racial

Methods: Procedures Consent or assent obtained q Tests administered individually at juvenile justice or correctional facilities q q Private, quiet rooms q Testing sessions conducted by trained research assistants

Methods: Measures P-CHIP Vignette: � Crime: Man reported someone stole his watch and kicked him � Police think a 14 -year-old boy named Joe Stole the watch, and Kicked the man � 26 interrogation situations Directive Non-Directive Suppose Joe did not do either of these two crimes: He did not steal the watch or kick the man. Right now, will he say he did it anyway? Definitely Probably A little Probably Definitely no 0 no no yes yes 5

Methods: Measures Comprehension of Miranda Rights – II Recognition – II (CMR-R(CMR-II) Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI) Comprehension of Miranda Vocabulary – II (CMV-II) Function of Rights in Interrogation (FRI)

Methods: Measures q Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale-2 q Demographics questionnaire

Hypotheses Self-reported false-confession likelihood: � Juveniles > Adults Highest for 12 -14 year olds Mediation: Suggestibility False Confession Score Age Miranda Comprehension

Results: Self-reported likelihood of false confession by age Leaning towards Definitely would χ2 (3, N = 260) = 16. 10, p < 0. 01 χ2 (3, N = 260) = 27. 12, p < 0. 01 70% 63% 45% 42% 29% 30% 23% 18% 12 -14 15 -16 17 -19 Adult

Results: Average P-CHIP item score for each category of interrogation tactic by age *p <. 01 t (130) = 2. 86, p =. 01 3 2. 5 2 12 -14 15 -16 1. 5 17 -19 1 Adult 0. 5 0 Directive F (3, 256) = 6. 33, p < . 01 Non-directive F (3, 256) = 3. 93, p =. 01

Results: Mediation Suggestibility False Confession Score Age Miranda Comprehension Proposed Mediator Whole Model 95% CI CMR-II [-0. 49, 0. 02] [-0. 11, 0. 32] CMR-R [-0. 27, 0. 02] FRI [-0. 17, 0. 14]

Implications Greater protections for youth under 15 years of age, such as: (e. g. , Birckhead, 2008; Feld, 2006) �Videotaping of all interrogations �Discourage police from using certain tactics with young juveniles (Feld, 2006) Certain types of directive techniques Implying leniency Using false evidence

Limitations and Future Directions LIMITATIONS Self-report instrument Ecological Validity � Stress & suggestibility FUTURE DIRECTIONS Further assess validity of the P-CHIP (e. g. , Gudjonsson & Singh, 1984; Richardson et al. , 1995) Underestimation of false confession likelihood? Examine other mediators of age and false confession Evaluate impact of suggested protections on false confession behavior

Thank you! ehh 29@drexel. edu