Leo Richard A, Liu Brittany
School of Law, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94117, U.S.A.
Behav Sci Law. 2009 May-Jun;27(3):381-99. doi: 10.1002/bsl.872.
Psychological police interrogation methods in America inevitably involve some level of pressure and persuasion to achieve their goal of eliciting confessions of guilt from custodial suspects. In this article, we surveyed potential jurors about their perceptions of a range of psychological interrogation techniques, the likelihood that such techniques would elicit a true confession from guilty suspects, and the likelihood that such techniques could elicit a false confession from innocent suspects. Participants recognized that these interrogation techniques may be psychologically coercive and may elicit true confessions, but believed that psychologically coercive interrogation techniques are not likely to elicit false confessions. The findings from this survey study indicate that potential jurors believe that false confessions are both counter- intuitive and unlikely, even in response to psychologically coercive interrogation techniques that have been shown to lead to false confessions from the innocent. This study provides empirical support for the idea that expert witnesses may helpfully inform jurors about the social science research on psychologically coercive interrogation methods and how and why such interrogation techniques can lead to false confessions.
美国警方的心理审讯方法不可避免地涉及一定程度的压力和说服手段，以实现从被拘留嫌疑人那里获取有罪供述的目标。在本文中，我们调查了潜在陪审员对一系列心理审讯技术的看法，这些技术从有罪嫌疑人那里获取真实供述的可能性，以及这些技术从无辜嫌疑人那里获取虚假供述的可能性。参与者认识到这些审讯技术可能具有心理强制性，可能会引出真实供述，但认为心理强制审讯技术不太可能引出虚假供述。这项调查研究的结果表明，潜在陪审员认为虚假供述既不符合直觉，也不太可能发生，即使是针对那些已被证明会导致无辜者作出虚假供述的心理强制审讯技术。这项研究为以下观点提供了实证支持，即专家证人可以有益地向陪审员介绍关于心理强制审讯方法的社会科学研究，以及此类审讯技术如何以及为何会导致虚假供述。
