Interrogation techniques and memory distrust

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract forty-three convicted sex offenders read each of four different offence vignettes that involved a man forcing a female victim into sex and the offender's subsequent police interview. The experimental manipulation involved giving participants each of four different scenarios concerning how the police interviewed the offender. These were interviews characterized by humanity, dominance, displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions, or a neutral, control interview. Participants were required to rate the interviews on a variety of dimensions, such as the offender's likelihood of confessing, and the fairness of the interview. Where participants were told the man had been interviewed with humanity and compassion, they rated the offender as more likely to confess and rated the interview as fairer than the other conditions. In contrast, participants rated the offender interviewed with a dominant approach as less likely to confess, and for this procedure to be less fair than the other conditions. Displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions appeared to have had no influence on perceived likelihood of confessions but was perceived to make the crime appear less serious.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)425-434
JournalPsychology Crime & Law
Volume14
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2008

Cite this

@article{183f14708e6d4629a5a7247c52fa4de8,
title = "Interrogation techniques and memory distrust",
abstract = "Abstract forty-three convicted sex offenders read each of four different offence vignettes that involved a man forcing a female victim into sex and the offender's subsequent police interview. The experimental manipulation involved giving participants each of four different scenarios concerning how the police interviewed the offender. These were interviews characterized by humanity, dominance, displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions, or a neutral, control interview. Participants were required to rate the interviews on a variety of dimensions, such as the offender's likelihood of confessing, and the fairness of the interview. Where participants were told the man had been interviewed with humanity and compassion, they rated the offender as more likely to confess and rated the interview as fairer than the other conditions. In contrast, participants rated the offender interviewed with a dominant approach as less likely to confess, and for this procedure to be less fair than the other conditions. Displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions appeared to have had no influence on perceived likelihood of confessions but was perceived to make the crime appear less serious.",
author = "{van Bergen}, S.H.E.M. and M. Jelicic and H.L.G.J. Merckelbach",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10683160701822533",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "425--434",
journal = "Psychology Crime & Law",
issn = "1068-316X",
publisher = "Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group",
number = "5",

}

Interrogation techniques and memory distrust. / van Bergen, S.H.E.M.; Jelicic, M.; Merckelbach, H.L.G.J.

In: Psychology Crime & Law, Vol. 14, No. 5, 01.01.2008, p. 425-434.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interrogation techniques and memory distrust

AU - van Bergen, S.H.E.M.

AU - Jelicic, M.

AU - Merckelbach, H.L.G.J.

PY - 2008/1/1

Y1 - 2008/1/1

N2 - Abstract forty-three convicted sex offenders read each of four different offence vignettes that involved a man forcing a female victim into sex and the offender's subsequent police interview. The experimental manipulation involved giving participants each of four different scenarios concerning how the police interviewed the offender. These were interviews characterized by humanity, dominance, displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions, or a neutral, control interview. Participants were required to rate the interviews on a variety of dimensions, such as the offender's likelihood of confessing, and the fairness of the interview. Where participants were told the man had been interviewed with humanity and compassion, they rated the offender as more likely to confess and rated the interview as fairer than the other conditions. In contrast, participants rated the offender interviewed with a dominant approach as less likely to confess, and for this procedure to be less fair than the other conditions. Displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions appeared to have had no influence on perceived likelihood of confessions but was perceived to make the crime appear less serious.

AB - Abstract forty-three convicted sex offenders read each of four different offence vignettes that involved a man forcing a female victim into sex and the offender's subsequent police interview. The experimental manipulation involved giving participants each of four different scenarios concerning how the police interviewed the offender. These were interviews characterized by humanity, dominance, displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions, or a neutral, control interview. Participants were required to rate the interviews on a variety of dimensions, such as the offender's likelihood of confessing, and the fairness of the interview. Where participants were told the man had been interviewed with humanity and compassion, they rated the offender as more likely to confess and rated the interview as fairer than the other conditions. In contrast, participants rated the offender interviewed with a dominant approach as less likely to confess, and for this procedure to be less fair than the other conditions. Displaying an understanding of sex offenders’ cognitive distortions appeared to have had no influence on perceived likelihood of confessions but was perceived to make the crime appear less serious.

U2 - 10.1080/10683160701822533

DO - 10.1080/10683160701822533

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 425

EP - 434

JO - Psychology Crime & Law

JF - Psychology Crime & Law

SN - 1068-316X

IS - 5

ER -