This Scientific Review Paper and Commentaries of the American Psychology–Law Society (AP–LS), APA Division 41, reviews the literature on police interrogation and confession and distills from it important insights and policy recommendations.
By authorizing and endorsing Scientific Review Papers, the Society makes known the consensus views of its members and lends its authority to the conclusions reached. Scientific Review Papers are not merely the opinions of their authors, they are vetted and reviewed to assure they reflect the best research and analysis the Society has to offer.
Table of contents
Read the Introduction (Free)
- An American Psychology-Law Society Scientific Review Paper on Police Interrogation and Confession (PDF, 39KB)opens in new window
William C. Thompson
View Abstracts of the Articles
- Police-Induced Confessions: Risk Factors and Recommendations
Saul M. Kassin, Steven A. Drizin, Thomas Grisso, Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Richard A. Leo, and Allison D. Redlich - High-Risk Interrogation: Using the "Mr. Big Technique" to Elicit Confessions
Steven M. Smith, Veronica Stinson, and Marc W. Patry - Videotaped Interrogations and Confessions: What's Obvious in Hindsight May Not Be in Foresight
G. Daniel Lassiter - The Need for a Positive Psychological Approach and Collaborative Effort for Improving Practice in the Interrogation Room
Christian A. Meissner, Maria Hartwig, and Melissa B. Russano - Biases in Judging Victims and Suspects Whose Statements Are Inconsistent
Lindsay C. Malloy and Michael E. Lamb - Police-Induced Confessions, Risk Factors, and Recommendations: Looking Ahead
Saul M. Kassin, Steven A. Drizin, Thomas Grisso, Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Richard A. Leo, and Allison D. Redlich
