Abstract
Modifications to a Canadian police caution on the right to silence were made in an attempt to increase its comprehensibility. University participants were asked to imagine themselves in an arrest and interrogation situation in which they were either innocent or guilty. It was hypothesized that participants who received the modified caution would score significantly higher on measures of comprehension than those who received the standard caution. Results indicated that comprehension was significantly higher among those that received the modified caution and that those with higher comprehension scores were more likely to exercise their right to silence. These findings suggest that clarifying and standardizing how a detainee’s rights are communicated will lead to better comprehension and greater protection against false or coerced confessions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
