![]() ![]() Corroborating confessions: An empirical analysis of legal safeguards against false confessions. ![]() ![]() Taken as a whole, these studies raise serious questions concerning the use of minimization and maximization as methods of interrogation and the confessions they produce as evidence in court.Īubry, A., & Caputo, R. Experiment 3 demonstrated that although mock jurors discounted a confession elicited by a threat of punishment, their conviction rate was significantly increased by confessions that followed from promises or minimization. As indicated on a subsequent questionnaire, maximization communicated high sentencing expectations as in an explicit threat of punishment, while minimization implied low sentencing expectations as did an explicit offer of leniency. In Experiments 1 and 2, subjects read interrogation transcripts in which an interrogator used one of five methods to try to elicit a confession: a promise of leniency, threat of punishment, minimization, maximization, or none of the above. The present research examined the possible effects of two methods of police interrogation: maximization, a technique in which the interrogator exaggerates the strength of the evidence and the magnitude of the charges, and minimization, a technique in which the interrogator mitigates the crime and plays down the seriousness of the offense. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |