Research-Based Instructions Induce Sensitivity to Confession Evidence

Abstract

Evidence is mixed on whether or not laypersons have sufficient knowledge of false confession risk factors. Procedural safeguards such as judicial instructions may assist jurors who are unable to effectively evaluate confession evidence. Participants were randomly assigned to one of five conditions that varied in the quality of a confession and the presence of instructions on coercive interrogation techniques. The results indicate that instructions induce sensitivity by altering verdict decisions and perceptions of evidence strength and confession voluntariness in line with the quality of the interrogation. Furthermore, the presence of instructions in low-quality interrogations resulted in participants completely discounting the confession. These findings suggest that research-based instructions on coercive interrogation techniques may be an effective safeguard against the use of potentially unreliable confession evidence.