Police-induced confessions: Risks and recommendations

Throughout the world, confessions serve an important function in law enforcement and the administration of criminal justice. Analyses of wrongful convictions in the United States and elsewhere, however, have shown that admissions and confessions drawn from innocent people—a highly counterintuitive phenomenon—are a major contributing factor. In 2010, Kassin et al. published a Scientific Review Paper (SRP) in which they reviewed basic principles of psychology and forensic research that identified the types of police interrogation practices and suspect vulnerabilities that increase the risk. In light of additional exonerations and an explosion of new research, an article from Kassin et al. (2025) published in Law and Human Behavior aims to update and expand that earlier review by considering not only the causes and correlates of false confessions but the harmful consequences that follow and the remedies that should be implemented to prevent their occurrence.

The article is motivated by four objectives. The first is to bring together a multidisciplinary group of scholars (from clinical, social, cognitive, and developmental psychology; law and criminology) to review the state of the relevant science. The second objective is to identify the personal and situational factors that compromise the reliability of confession evidence. Third, the authors seek to extend their analysis to the consequences of confessions—namely, their biasing effects on eyewitnesses, alibis, and forensic examiners; their tendency to increase the rate of false guilty pleas and jury convictions at trial; and the stigma that follows innocent confessors through the system, even after exoneration. Fourth, Kassin and colleagues summarize recent research on science-based cognitive alternatives to suspect interviewing that help to prevent police-induced false confessions.

In light of data showing that Miranda warnings fail to safeguard the accused, the authors propose the following remedies:

1. mandate the video recording of all suspect interviews and interrogations in their entirety and from a “neutral” camera angle;
2. require that police have an evidence-based suspicion before commencing a guilt-presumptive interrogation;
3. curb the use of accusatorial tactics by imposing limits on detention and interrogation time and banning the presentations of false evidence and minimization themes that imply leniency;
4. adopt a science-based model of cognitive interviewing as an alternative;
5. protect youthful suspects and vulnerable adults by mandating the presence of a defense attorney, and a suitable appropriate adult where required;
6. shield lay witnesses and forensic examiners from confessions to ensure the independence of their judgments; and
7. abolish contributory clauses from compensation statutes that penalize innocent individuals who confessed and/or pled guilty.

The authors suggest that these reforms will help to prevent confession-based wrongful convictions and improve the administration of justice for all concerned.

This article is in the Forensic Psychology topic area.

Kassin, S. M., Cleary, H. M. D., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A. D., & Scherr, K. C. (2025). Police-induced confessions, 2.0: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000593

Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34(1), 3–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-009-9188-6

Saul M. Kassin is distinguished professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and professor emeritus at Williams College. Starting in the 1980s, he initiated research on the causes and consequences of false confessions, for which he has received a number of awards. He is also an author/editor of numerous books—including DUPED: Why Innocent People Confess — And Why We Believe Their Confessions.

Hayley M. D. Cleary is associate professor of criminal justice and public policy at Virginia Commonwealth University. Cleary’s research examines adolescent behavior and decision making in criminal legal system contexts; the cornerstone of her research program is police interrogation of young people. Her research has been funded by the National Science Foundation and Annie E. Casey Foundation and featured in national media outlets.

Gisli H. Gudjonsson is a professor emeritus of forensic psychology at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London. Formerly a detective in Iceland, he went on to become a clinical psychologist, pioneer the empirical measurement of interrogative suggestibility, and publish extensively on psychological vulnerabilities, false confessions, and police interviewing. He has provided expert evaluations in several high-profile cases internationally. 

Richard A. Leo is the Hamill Family Professor of Law and Psychology at the University San Francisco School of Law. For more than three decades, his research has focused on police interrogation practices, the impact of Miranda, psychological coercion, false confessions, and wrongful convictions. He has received numerous individual and career achievement awards, as well as Soros and Guggenheim fellowships. 

Christian A. Meissner is professor and director of graduate education in the Department of Psychology at Iowa State University. He conducts research on the psychological processes involved in developing rapport and trust, understanding resistance motivations, facilitating recollection, and assessing credibility in investigative interviews. He is an elected fellow of APA, the Association for Psychological Science, and the Psychonomic Society.

Allison D. Redlich is a distinguished university professor in the Department of Criminology, Law and Society at George Mason University. Trained in developmental psychology, and funded by NSF, NIJ, and other organizations, she has published extensive research on police interrogations, confessions, guilty pleas, and mental health courts. She has also received teaching and mentoring awards from two national societies.

Kyle C. Scherr is professor of psychology at Central Michigan University. Trained in social psychology, his programs of research include suspect decision making during custodial interrogations, cognitive biases in forensic evidence gathering and analysis, issues associated with wrongful convictions and the processes leading to exoneration, and people’s judgments of individuals exonerated after a wrongful conviction.