The Impact of Just World Beliefs and Public SelfConsciousness on the Cooperativeness of Innocent Suspects Rachel

1

Introduction Emerging data suggests that innocent suspects may be more compliant with police investigations, which in turn paradoxically increases their risk of being misjudged as guilty (e.g., Kassin, 2005). Relative to guilty suspects, innocents tend to be more forthcoming with information (Hartwig et al., 2006), more likely to waive their Miranda rights (Kassin & Norwick, 2004), and more likely to elicit high-pressure interrogations (Kassin et al., 2003). One proposed mechanism for this “innocence effect” is Belief in a Just World (BJW; Lerner, 1980). That is to say, innocent suspects may comply because they believe that their innocence renders them immune to negative outcomes. Limited support exists for this hypothesis; in one study, Jordan and Hartwig (2012) found that innocent suspects who were high in BJW were less nervous during a simulated police interview than those low in BJW. A second possible mechanism is the illusion of transparency (Gilovich et al., 1998). That is to say, innocent suspects may comply because they believe that their innocence will be obvious to others. Similarly, others have found that high levels of public self-consciousness – i.e., the awareness of oneself as a social object – predict compliance (e.g., Froming & Carver, 1981). The current study first explored whether innocence affects the key behavioral decisions of suspects during a criminal investigation. Secondly, we tested BJW and public self-consciousness as moderators of this effect, predicting that innocence would have a greater impact on behavior among those who exhibited high levels of either.

Jeff

& Saul M.

2 Kassin

John F. Kennedy High School, 2 John Jay College of Criminal Justice

Method

Results (cont.)

Participants

Innocence X Belief in a Just World (BJW)

A snowball sample of 80 individuals was obtained via Amazon Mechanical Turk and social media websites. A majority was female (69%) and 21-50 years old (53%). Procedure Participants first completed the Belief in a Just World Scale (Rubin & Peplau, 1975) and the Self-Consciousness Scale (Fenigstein et al., 1975). Using median splits, all were later classified as high or low in overall BJW score, as well as high or low in Public Self-Consciousness subscore. Participants were then randomly assigned to read one of two vignettes, in which they imagined themselves as either guilty (n = 37) or innocent (n = 43) of shoplifting. All then imagined being interviewed by a police officer later that day as a suspect in a shoplifting investigation. Dependent Measures Participants were asked how they would respond to nine yes/no requests made by the police officer; for each, one response indicated compliance. Their responses to these questions were then summed to create an overall compliance score, which could range from 0 to 9.

Results Overall Effect of Innocence • Overall, innocent suspects produced higher compliance scores (M = 4.84, SD = 3.07) than guilty suspects (M = 2.30, SD = 2.37), t(78) = 4.09, p < .001, d = 0.93. Question % Guilty % Innoc. χ2(1) p Can we ask you a few questions? 70.27 93.02 7.13 .008 Are you willing to waive… right to remain silent? 18.92 51.16 8.95 .003 *Would you like to have an attorney present...? 94.59 60.47 12.79 < .001 Will you come to the police station to talk...? 43.24 65.12 3.84 .050 May we search your car? 16.22 46.51 8.32 .004 May we search your house? 13.51 41.86 7.80 .005 May we examine your clothing? 18.92 51.16 8.95 .003 May we look through your recent phone calls...? 16.22 44.19 7.24 .007 May we have your friend’s contact info? 27.03 51.16 4.83 .028

Table 1. Innocent suspects were more likely to comply with eight of the officer’s nine discrete requests.

φ .30 .33 .40 .22 .32 .31 .33 .30 .25

7

Compliance Score

Participants (N = 80) imagined themselves as a guilty or innocent suspect and indicated how they would respond to police requests for their compliance. Overall, innocent suspects complied more often than did guilty suspects. This effect was especially strong among those who scored high in public self-consciousness, suggesting that the illusion of transparency may moderate the effect of innocence on behavior.

2 Kukucka ,

6

Guilty

Innocent

5 4 3 2 1 0

Low

BJW Score

High

Discussion In a hypothetical crime scenario, innocent suspects were more compliant with police than guilty suspects, both overall and across eight of nine discrete behaviors. Our findings thus support the idea that innocent suspects – by virtue of their innocence – may behave in ways that increase the likelihood of their being misjudged as guilty. However, this effect was stronger among those who scored high in public self-consciousness. These individuals are sensitive to the judgments of others, and may be highly driven to convince investigators of their innocence. Insofar as they also believe that their innocence will be selfevident, this illusion of transparency may be responsible for the effect of innocence on their behavior.

• Main effect of Innocence , F(1,74) = 14.13, p < .001, d = .88 • No main effect of BJW, F(1,74) = 0.00, p = .990, d = .25 • No significant interaction, F(1,74) = 3.17, p = .079, η2p = .04 • Among low BJW individuals, Innocence had no effect on compliance scores, t(37) = 1.45, p = .155, d = .49. • Among high BJW individuals, Innocent suspects were more compliant, t(37) = 3.79, p = .001, d = 1.32.

Innocence X Public Self-Consciousness (SC) 7

Compliance Score

Abstract

1 Abramowitz ,

6

Guilty

Innocent

4 3 2 1 0

Public SC Score

In any event, the current study suggests a fruitful avenue for future research aimed at understanding the mechanisms underlying the phenomenology of innocence.

References

5

Low

One might argue that the use of an imagined crime scenario limits the validity of these findings. However, the heightened social pressure and potential consequences of an actual police interview would likely increase compliance even further (e.g., Milgram, 1963). Thus it could likewise be argued that the current study actually underestimates the true magnitude of the innocence effect.

High

• Main effect of Innocence, F(1,72) = 12.63, p = .001, d = .87 • Marginal effect of Public SC, F(1,72) = 3.70, p = .059, d = .59 • Marginal interaction, F(1,72) = 3.74, p = .057, η2p = .05 • Among low Public SC individuals, Innocence had no effect on compliance scores, t(32) = 1.18, p = .248, d = .39. • Among high Public SC individuals, Innocent suspects were more compliant, t(32) = 3.80, p = .001, d = 1.38.

Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522-527. Froming, W. J.,& Carver, C. S. (1981). Divergent influences of private and public self- consciousness in a compliance paradigm. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 159-171. Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). The illusion of transparency: Biased assessments of others’ ability to read one’s emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 332-346. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., & Kronkvist, O. (2006). Strategic use of evidence during police interviews: When training to detect deception works. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 603-619. Jordan, S., & Hartwig, M. (2012). On the phenomenology of innocence: The role of belief in a just world. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20, 749-760. Kassin, S. M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk? American Psychologist, 60, 215-228. Kassin, S. M., Goldstein, C. C., & Savitsky, K. (2003). Behavioral confirmation in the interrogation room: On the dangers of presuming guilt. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 187-203. Kassin, S. M., & Norwick, R. J. (2004). Why people waive their Miranda rights: The power of innocence. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 211-221. Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378. Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65-89.

Contact Information [email protected]