How downplaying or exaggerating crime severity in a confession affects perceived guilt. Issue 4 (4th July 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Holt, Glenys A.; Palmer, Matthew A.
• Is Part Of: Psychiatry, psychology, and law. Volume 28:Issue 4(2021)
• Page Start: 599
• Page End: 611
• Publication Date: 2021-07-04
• Subjects: attribution theory -- false confession -- juror decision-making -- inconsistencies -- wrongful conviction; Criminal psychology -- Periodicals; Forensic psychiatry -- Periodicals; Mentally ill offenders -- Periodicals; 345.9404
• DOI: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1837027
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1321-8719

Abstract

Abstract : This study investigates how judgments of guilt are influenced by factual errors in confessions that either amplify or downplay the severity of the crime. Participants read a confession statement and police report in which either the confession was consistent with the police report, the suspect admitted to a worse crime or the suspect admitted to a lesser crime. Mediation analyses showed that, compared to consistent confessions, both types of directional errors reduced judgments of guilt. Inconsistencies that made the suspect look better – but not those that made the suspect look worse –also increased judgments of guilt via a direct effect. Confessions that contain errors that appear to exaggerate the severity of the crime prompt no higher judgments of suspect guilt; however, errors in confessions that are perceived to downplay the severity of the crime can prompt an increased perception of suspect guilt compared to a consistent confession.