To deny or to confess: An interrogation decision-making model
dc.contributor.advisor | Stephanie Madon | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Dan Nettleton | |
dc.contributor.author | Yang, Yueran | |
dc.contributor.department | Psychology | |
dc.date | 2018-08-11T09:51:13.000 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-06-30T03:06:52Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-06-30T03:06:52Z | |
dc.date.copyright | Fri Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2016 | |
dc.date.embargo | 2001-01-01 | |
dc.date.issued | 2016-01-01 | |
dc.description.abstract | <p>This dissertation seeks to explain suspects’ decision-making processes within the context of a custodial interrogation by presenting a new model of confessions referred to as the interrogation decision-making model. The model proposes that suspects’ decision-making process can be analyzed at two different levels—a micro-level process and a macro-level process. Drawing on expected utility theory (Edwards, 1962; Shoemaker, 1982; Von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944), the micro-level process of the model introduces a mathematical framework to explain the psychological mechanisms underlying suspects’ single interrogation decision at a certain point in time. The macro-level process of the model describes the dynamic nature of suspects’ multiple interrogation decisions throughout an interrogation. These two processes jointly explain suspects’ decisions to deny or confess guilt during a custodial interrogation.</p> <p>This dissertation also describes two experimental studies that tested key predictions generated by the model. Experiment 1 (N = 205) tested the prediction that suspects decide whether to deny or confess guilt on the basis of a proximal outcome’s perceived desirability, or in terms of the model, its perceived utility. Experiment 2 (N = 158) tested the prediction that suspects decide whether to deny or confess guilt on the basis of a distal outcome’s perceived utility. The results of the experiments were mixed. Whereas the utility of a proximal outcome did not significantly influence participants’ admissions and denials of prior misconduct, the utility of a distal outcome did. These findings provide partial support for the model by showing that a critical factor affecting suspects’ decision-making is the perceived utility of distal outcomes.</p> | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.identifier | archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/15845/ | |
dc.identifier.articleid | 6852 | |
dc.identifier.contextkey | 11165429 | |
dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.31274/etd-180810-5472 | |
dc.identifier.s3bucket | isulib-bepress-aws-west | |
dc.identifier.submissionpath | etd/15845 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/handle/20.500.12876/30028 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.source.bitstream | archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/15845/Yang_iastate_0097E_15985.pdf|||Fri Jan 14 20:47:26 UTC 2022 | |
dc.subject.disciplines | Psychology | |
dc.subject.keywords | confession | |
dc.subject.keywords | decision-making | |
dc.subject.keywords | expected utility | |
dc.subject.keywords | police interrogation | |
dc.title | To deny or to confess: An interrogation decision-making model | |
dc.type | dissertation | |
dc.type.genre | dissertation | |
dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | 796236b3-85a0-4cde-b154-31da9e94ed42 | |
thesis.degree.discipline | Psychology; Statistics | |
thesis.degree.level | dissertation | |
thesis.degree.name | Doctor of Philosophy |
File
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
- Name:
- Yang_iastate_0097E_15985.pdf
- Size:
- 1.65 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description: