Published in

Taylor & Francis (Routledge), Psychology, Crime and Law, 1(12), p. 61-75

DOI: 10.1080/1068310042000303076

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

False confessions in the lab: Do plausibility and consequences matter?

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

The present paper describes three studies that examined false confessions in the laboratory. Studies 1 (N0/56) and 2 (N0/9) relied on the by now classic computer crash paradigm introduced by Kassin and Kiechel (Psychological Science , 7 , 125 Á/128, 1996). Study 3 (N0/12) employed a novel paradigm in which undergraduate participants were falsely accused of exam fraud. Our data indicate that false confessions do occur, even when conditions become more ecologically valid. Furthermore, we explored whether individual differences in compliance, suggestibility, fantasy proneness, dissociation, and cognitive failures are related to false confessions. Of these, only fantasy proneness was associated with false confessions.