Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp 452–465 | Cite as

Modeling the Influence of Investigator Bias on the Elicitation of True and False Confessions

  • Fadia M. Narchet
  • Christian A. Meissner
  • Melissa B. Russano
Original Article


The aim of this study was to model various social and cognitive processes believed to be associated with true and false confessions by exploring the link between investigative biases and what occurs in the interrogation room. Using the Russano et al. (Psychol Sci 16:481–486, 2005) paradigm, this study explored how perceptions of guilt influenced the frequency and type of interrogation tactics used, suspect’s perceptions of the interrogation process, the likelihood of confession, and investigator’s resulting perceptions of culpability. Results suggested that investigator bias led to the increased use of minimization tactics and thereby increased the likelihood of false confessions by innocent participants. In contrast, the manipulation of investigator bias had no direct or indirect influence on guilty participants. These findings confirm the important role of investigator bias and improve our understanding of the decision-making process associated with true and false confessions.


Confessions Interrogations Investigator bias Confirmation bias 


  1. Abboud, B., Wadkins, T. A., Forrest, K. D., Lange, J., & Alavi, S. (2002, March). False confessions: Is the gender of the interrogator a determining factor? Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  2. Asch, S. E. (1952). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70, 416.Google Scholar
  3. Berggren, E. (1975). The psychology of confessions. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  4. Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  6. Darley, J. M., & Fazio, R. H. (1980). Expectancy confirmation processes arising in the social interaction sequence. American Psychologist, 35, 867–881. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.35.10.867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Drizin, S., & Leo, R. A. (2004). The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 891–1007.Google Scholar
  8. Forrest, K. D., Wadkins, T. A., & Larson, B. A. (2006). Suspect personality, police interrogations, and false confessions: Maybe it is not just the situation. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 621–628. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forrest, K. D., Wadkins, T. A., & Miller, R. L. (2002). The role of pre-existing stress on false confessions: An empirical study. The Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology, 3, 23–45.Google Scholar
  10. Gordon, N. J., & Fleisher, W. L. (2006). Effective interviewing and interrogation techniques (2nd ed.). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1989a). Theoretical and empirical aspects of interrogative suggestibility. In V. A. Gheorghiu, P. Netter, H. J. Eysenck, & R. Rosenthal (Eds.), Suggestion and suggestibility (pp. 135–143). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1989b). The psychology of false confessions. The Medico-Legal Journal, 57, 93–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  14. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (1994). How frequently do false confessions occur? An empirical study among prison inmates. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 1, 21–26. doi: 10.1080/10683169408411933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (1996). The relationship of confabulation to the memory, intelligence, suggestibility, and personality of prison inmates. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 85–92. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199602)10:1<85:AID-ACP372>3.0.CO;2-I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., Asgeirsdottir, B. B., & Sigfusdottir, I. D. (2006). Custodial interrogation, false confession and individual differences: A national study among Icelandic youth. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 49–59. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.12.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hilgendorf, E. L., & Irving, M. (1981). A decision-making model of confessions. In M. Lloyd-Bostock (Ed.), Psychology in legal contexts: Applications and limitations (pp. 67–84). London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  18. Hill, C., Memon, A., & McGeorge, P. (2008). The role of confirmation bias in suspect interviews: A systematic evaluation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 357–371. doi: 10.1348/135532507X238682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21, 967–988. doi: 10.1177/014920639502100509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Holmes, W. D. (2002). Criminal interrogation: A modern format for interrogating criminal suspects based on the intellectual approach. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, LTD.Google Scholar
  21. Horselenberg, R., Merckelbach, H., & Josephs, S. (2003). Individual differences and false confessions: A conceptual replication of Kassin and Kiechel. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9, 1–8. doi: 10.1080/10683160308141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2001). Criminal interrogation and confessions (4th ed.). Gaithersberg, MD: Aspen.Google Scholar
  23. Joreskog, K., & Sorbum, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
  24. Kassin, S. M. (1997). The psychology of confession evidence. American Psychologist, 52, 221–233. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.3.221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kassin, S. M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk? American Psychologist, 60, 215–228. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.3.215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 3–38. doi: 10.1007/s10979-009-9188-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kassin, S. M., Goldstein, C. J., & Savitsky, K. (2003). Behavioral confirmation in the interrogation room: On the dangers of presuming guilt. Law and Human Behavior, 87, 187–203. doi: 10.1023/A:1022599230598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2005). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 33–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00016.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kassin, S. M., & Kiechel, K. L. (1996). The social psychology of false confessions: Compliance, internalization, and confabulation. Psychological Science, 7, 125–128. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00344.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kassin, S. M., Leo, R. A., Meissner, C. A., Richman, K. D., Colwell, L. H., Leach, A-M., & La Fon, D. (2007). Police interviewing and interrogation: A self-report survey of police practices and beliefs. Law & Human Behavior, 31, 381–400. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9073-5.
  31. Kassin, S. M., & McNall, K. (1991). Police interrogations and confessions: Communicating promises and threats by pragmatic implication. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 233–251. doi: 10.1007/BF01061711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kassin, S. M., Meissner, C. A., & Norwick, R. (2005). “I’d know a false confession if I saw one”: A comparative study of college students and police interrogators. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 211–228. doi: 10.1007/s10979-005-2416-9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Klaver, J., Lee, Z., & Rose, V. G. (2008). Effects of personality, interrogation techniques, and plausibility in an experimental false confession paradigm. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 71–88. doi: 10.1348/135532507X193051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leo, R. A. (2008). Police interrogation and American justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. McNatt, D. B. (2000). Ancient Pygmalion joins contemporary management: A meta-analysis of the result. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 314–322. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meissner, C. A., Hartwig, M., & Russano, M. B. (2010a). The need for a positive psychological approach and collaborative effort for improving practice in the interrogation room. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 43–45. doi: 10.1007/s10979-009-9205-9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meissner, C. A., & Kassin, S. M. (2002). “He’s guilty!”: Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 469–480. doi: 10.1023/A:1020278620751.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meissner, C. A., & Kassin, S. M. (2004). “You’re guilty, so just confess!” Cognitive and behavioral confirmation biases in the interrogation room. In D. Lassiter’s (Ed.), Interrogations, confessions, and entrapment. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  39. Meissner, C. A., Russano, M. B., & Narchet, F. M. (2010b). The importance of a laboratory science for improving the diagnostic value of confession evidence. In G. D. Lassiter & C. Meissner’s (Eds.), Police interrogations and false confessions: Current research, practice, and policy recommendations (pp. 111–126). Washington, DC: APA. doi: 10.1037/12085-007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  41. Moston, S., Stephenson, G. M., & Williamson, T. M. (1992). The effects of case characteristics on suspect behaviour during questioning. British Journal of Criminology, 32, 23–40.Google Scholar
  42. Ofshe, R. J., & Leo, R. A. (1997). The social psychology of police interrogation. The theory and classification of true and false confessions. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 16, 189–251.Google Scholar
  43. Redlich, A. D., & Goodman, G. S. (2003). Taking responsibility for an act not committed: The influence of age and suggestibility. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 141–156. doi: 10.1023/A:1022543012851.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the Classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  45. Russano, M. B., Meissner, C. M., Narchet, F. M., & Kassin, S. M. (2005). True and false confessions to an intentional act: A novel paradigm. Psychological Science, 16, 481–486.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Schafer, J. R., & Navarro, J. (2004). Advanced interviewing techniques: Proven strategies for law enforcement, military, and security personnel. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, LTD.Google Scholar
  47. Snyder, M. A., Tanke, E. D., & Bercheid, E. (1977). Social perceptions and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 656–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zulawski, D. E., & Wicklander, D. E. (2001). Practical aspects of interviewing and interrogation (2nd ed.). London: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fadia M. Narchet
    • 1
  • Christian A. Meissner
    • 2
  • Melissa B. Russano
    • 3
  1. 1.University of New HavenWest HavenUSA
  2. 2.University of TexasEl PasoUSA
  3. 3.Roger William UniversityBristolUSA

Personalised recommendations