The psychology of interrogations and confessions
By G. Gudjonsson. 2002
215 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Social Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/904ecca471a0e2ff092772da8b4f1c2640612f27
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Social Psychology
- A. Redlich
- S. Brandon
- Sujeeta Bhatt
- Jacqueline R. Evans
- Kimberley A. Wade
- Robert A. Nash
- Christian A. Meissner
- Stephen W. Michael
Citations in the corpus
- Innocent But Proven Guilty: Eliciting Internalized False Confessions Using Doctored-Video Evidence (2009, background): “This raises an important question: Could fake-video evidence lead people to believe they committed an act they never did? A number of recent studies have demonstrated that various forms of fake evidence can lead people to confess to things they did not do (Horselenberg, Merckelbach, & Josephs, 2003;”
- Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: a meta-analytic review (2014, methodology): “We also reviewed the reference sections of notable comprehensive reviews on interrogation (Bull et al. 2009; Fein 2006; Gudjonsson 2003; Justice et al. 2009; Kassin et al. 2010; Lassiter and Meissner 2010; Schollum 2005; Williamson 2006).”
- Psychological vulnerabilities during police interviews. Why are they important (2010, methodology): “As far as psychological vulnerabilities are concerned, these should not be interpreted in isolation to other surrounding factors (Gudjonsson, 2003a, b).”
- Why professionals fail to catch liars and how they can improve (2004, unknown): “For example, college students are on average more intelligent that suspects in police interviews (Gudjonsson, 2003) and this difference in intelligence might affect the way they tell lies (Ekman & Frank, 1993).”
- Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions (2012, background): “Pearse, Gudjonsson, Clare, and Rutter (1998). A primary intent of this study was to examine differences in psychological vulnerabilities between suspects who did vs.”