“I’d Know a False Confession if I Saw One”: A Comparative Study of College Students and Police Investigators

College students and police investigators watched or listened to 10 prison inmates confessing to crimes. Half the confessions were true accounts; half were false—concocted for the study. Consistent with much recent research, students were generally more accurate than police, and accuracy rates were higher among those presented with audiotaped than videotaped confessions. In addition, investigators were significantly more confident in their judgments and also prone to judge confessors guilty. To determine if police accuracy would increase if this guilty response bias were neutralized, participants in a second experiment were specifically informed that half the confessions were true and half were false. This manipulation eliminated the investigator response bias, but it did not increase accuracy or lower confidence. These findings are discussed for what they imply about the post-interrogation risks to innocent suspects who confess.     

Why People Waive Their Miranda Rights: The Power of Innocence

In a laboratory experiment, 72 participants who were guilty or innocent of a mock theft were apprehended for investigation. Motivated to avoid prosecution and trial, they were confronted by a neutral, sympathetic, or hostile male "detective" who sought a waiver of their Miranda rights. Later, 72 other participants watched videotapes of these sessions and answered questions about the detective and suspect. Strikingly, results showed that although the detective's demeanor had no effect, participants who were truly innocent were significantly more likely to sign a waiver than those who were guilty. Naively believing in the power of their innocence to set them free, most waived their rights even in the hostile detective condition, where the risk of interrogation was apparent. The conceptual and policy implications of these results are discussed.     

The Development of System Justification in the Developing World

System justification theorists have proposed that under some circumstances ‘‘people who suffer the most from a given state of affairs are paradoxically the least likely to question, challenge, reject, or change it’’ Jost et al. (2003). These claims are contrary to theories that suggest that group members seek to enhance their self-interest or group-interest (e.g., realistic group conflict theory, rational choice models). The present study, conducted in one of the poorest countries in the world, Bolivia, tested if even the most impoverished people of the world will endorse beliefs justifying the status quo. A survey of 356 Bolivian school children found that low-status children endorse beliefs in the effectiveness of government in meeting the people’s needs more than their high-status counterparts. The results suggest that system-justifying beliefs are endorsed by low-status group members in even the most extreme cases of poverty, and even among the youngest politically aware members of society, and they raise questions about the capacity for true social change in those parts of the world that may need it the most.

“He's guilty!”: Investigator Bias in Judgments of Truth and Deception

Detecting deception is an inherently difficult task, but one that plays a critical role for law enforcement investigators in the interrogation room. In general, research has failed to indicate that performance in this domain is improved by training or prior experience. A signal detection framework is applied to the paradigm to better conceptualize the influence of these two factors. We found that although neither factor influenced discrimination accuracy, there was an effect on response bias such that training and prior experience appeared to increase the likelihood of responding deceit as opposed to truth. This investigator bias was observed both in a review of the literature and in this study of North American law enforcement investigators who took part in a forensically based deception-detection task. Possible theoretical mechanisms and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Behavioral Confirmation in the Interrogation Room: On the Dangers of Presuming Guilt

A two-phased experiment tested the hypothesis that the presumption of guilt that underlies police interrogations activates a process of behavioral confirmation. In Phase I, 52 suspects guilty or innocent of a mock theft were questioned by 52 interrogators led to believe that most suspects were guilty or innocent. Interrogators armed with guilty as opposed to innocent expectations selected more guilt-presumptive questions, used more interrogation techniques, judged the suspect to be guilty, and exerted more pressure to get a confession—particularly when paired with innocent suspects. In Phase II, neutral observers listened to audiotapes of the suspect, interrogator, or both. They perceived suspects in the guilty expectations condition as more defensive—and as somewhat more guilty. Results indicate that a presumption of guilt sets in motion a process of behavioral confirmation by which expectations influence the interrogator's behavior, the suspect's behavior, and ultimately the judgments of neutral observers.     

THE TORONTO FORUM ON WOMEN ABUSE

This article describes the development of the Toronto Protocols for mediation in cases involving domestic violence. These protocols were developed by the Toronto Forum on Women Abuse and Mediation which convened representatives from the mediation and domestic violence provider communities. It provides a blueprint for the conduct of similar forums in other communities.     

Federal intellectual property

This paper, presented to the fall 1992 meeting of the Federal Laboratory Consortium, is a discussion of the function of ORTAs, lawyers, and laboratory directors in the technology-transfer process. It describes what the relationship between these professionals should be like if they are to be proficient at enhancing US intellectual property resources.     

Estimating Projectile Perpendicular Impact Velocity on Metal Sheet Targets from the Shape of the Target Hole

Abstract:  The correlation between bullet hole shapes in metal and projectile impact velocity was examined. A series of shots were fired from an M-16A1 assault rifle of 5.56 mm caliber toward a 1-mm thick metal target. All shots were fired at a perpendicular angle to the metal sheets, and the velocity was measured just before the projectile hit the target. Velocities ranged between 400 and 900 m/sec. From the replica of the shooting hole, a perpendicular plane was created, showing the symmetrical properties of the hole. The best mathematical equation describing the shape of the entrance hole was the exponential function in the form:
The empirical equation of the hole defined using the regression method is:
This equation describes the general shape of shooting holes created by velocities ranging from 440 to 750 m/sec. From this equation, one can estimate the bullet velocity when it hits the target.