The presumption of guilt in suspect interrogations: Apprehension as a trigger of confirmation bias and debiasing techniques.

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moa Lidén ◽  
Minna Gräns ◽  
Peter Juslin
Keyword(s):  
2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 250-250
Author(s):  
Thomas M. Fandel ◽  
Maria Pfnuer ◽  
Claudia Corinth ◽  
Michael Ansorge ◽  
Sebastian W. Melchior ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Edgcumbe

Pre-existing beliefs about the background or guilt of a suspect can bias the subsequent evaluation of evidence for forensic examiners and lay people alike. This biasing effect, called the confirmation bias, has influenced legal proceedings in prominent court cases such as that of Brandon Mayfield. Today many forensic providers attempt to train their examiners against these cognitive biases. Nine hundred and forty-two participants read a fictional criminal case and received either neutral, incriminating or exonerating evidence (fingerprint, eyewitness, or DNA) before providing an initial rating of guilt. Participants then viewed ambiguous evidence (alibi, facial composite, handwriting sample or informant statement) before providing a final rating of guilt. Final guilt ratings were higher for all evidence conditions (neutral, incriminating or exonerating) following exposure to the ambiguous evidence. This provides evidence that the confirmation bias influences the evaluation of evidence.


Philosophy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-97
Author(s):  
Hassan Alsharif ◽  
John Symons

AbstractThis paper argues that open-mindedness is a corrective virtue. It serves as a corrective to the epistemic vice of confirmation bias. Specifically, open-mindedness is the epistemically virtuous disposition to resist the negative effects of confirmation bias on our ability to reason well and to evaluate evidence and arguments. As part of the defense and presentation of our account, we explore four discussions of open-mindedness in the recent literature. All four approaches have strengths and shed light on aspects of the virtue of open-mindedness. Each mentions various symptoms of confirmation bias and some explore aspects of the corrective role of open-mindedness. However, ours is the first to explicitly identify open-mindedness as a corrective virtue to the specific epistemic vice of confirmation bias. We show how the corrective account also permits a response to the concern that open-mindedness might not actually count as a virtue.


2021 ◽  
pp. 002201832110274
Author(s):  
Philip NS Rumney ◽  
Duncan McPhee

The article explores the idea of ‘offender-centric’ policing in cases of rape, with its focus on suspect and offender admissions and behaviours. It features discussion of 11 cases, illustrating offender-centric pathways to charge or conviction, the challenges facing complainants, suspects and police officers, along with missed opportunities to focus on a suspect’s behaviour. The importance of victim care and support is discussed, and it is argued that victim care should accompany an offender-centric approach to rape investigation. It is also argued that there are potential dangers with offender-centric tactics, specifically, that without due care it may become a self-confirming investigative tool influenced by confirmation bias which may lead to flawed decision-making. The article concludes by arguing that offender-centric policing has benefits in those cases with suspects who engage in predatory behaviour, have a history of previously undisclosed sexual offending and domestic violence and other problematic behaviours. It also has value in focusing the attention of investigators on what steps were taken by a suspect to ascertain the complainant’s consent. While the offender-centric approach cannot address all investigative challenges in rape cases, it is a useful addition to existing strategies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document