Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Confidently Wrong: Police Endorsement of Psycho-Legal Misconceptions

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public beliefs about psychological issues relevant to the legal system have been demonstrated to often be misconceived, but the endorsement of such beliefs in law enforcement samples is largely unknown. This study was the first to compare psycho-legal beliefs between law enforcement officers and the general public in the UK. Participants were presented a 50-item questionnaire measuring five psycho-legal topics; police procedures, courts, tough on crime, mental illness, and memory and cognition. Despite direct involvement and relevant experience, law enforcement officers endorsed just as many empirically contradictory beliefs as those who were not law enforcement officers. Further, law enforcement officers were more confident in their responses. This research has implications for identifying areas of limited knowledge within police samples that can be targeted by police education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aamodt MG (2008) Reducing misconceptions and false beliefs in police and criminal psychology. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1231–1240. doi:10.1177/0093854808321527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruck M, Ceci SJ (1999) The suggestibility of children’s memory. Annu Rev Psychol 50:419–439. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cook AN, Roesch R (2011) Tough on crime reforms: what psychology has to say about the recent and proposed justice policy in Canada. Can Psychol. doi:10.1037/a0025045

    Google Scholar 

  • Dando CJ, Bull R (2011) Maximising opportunities to detect verbal deception: training police officers to interview tactically. J Investig Psychol Offender Profiling 8:189–202. doi:10.1002/jip.145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dando C, Wilcock R, Milne R (2008) The cognitive interview: inexperienced police officers’ perceptions of their witness/victim interviewing practices. Leg Criminol Psychol 13:59–70. doi:10.1348/135532506X162498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo BM, Charlton K, Cooper H, Lindsay JJ, Muhlenbruck L (1997) The accuracy-confidence correlation in the detection of deception. Personal Soc Psychol Rev 1(4):346–357. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0104_5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eilkann PT (1996) Tough-on-crime myth: real solutions to cut crime. Insight Publishing Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Bureau of Investigation (2015) FBI testimony on microscopic hair analysis contained errors in at least 90 percent of cases in ongoing review: 26 of 28 FBI analysts provided testimony or reports with errors [International Press Release]. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov

  • Iacono W (2008) Effective policing: understanding how polygraph tests work and are used. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1295–1308. doi:10.1177/0093854808321529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karagiorgakis A (2010) Police officer beliefs about factors that influence eyewitness memory. Dissertation. Retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/34/14/3414087.html

  • Kassin S (2008) Confession evidence: commonsense myths and misconceptions. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1309–1322. doi:10.1177/0093854808321557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski P, Taylor AK (2009) The effect of refuting misconceptions in the introductory psychology class. Teach Psychol 36(3):153–159. doi:10.1080/00986280902959986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leippe MR, Eisenstadt D (2014) Eyewitness confidence and the confidence-accuracy relationship in memory for people. The handbook of eyewitness psychology, 377–425

  • Lilienfeld SO, Landfield K (2008) Science and pseudoscience in law enforcement a user-friendly primer. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1215–1230. doi:10.1177/0093854808321526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld SO, Lynn SJ, Lohr JM (Eds.) (2012) Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology. Guilford Press

  • Lilienfeld SO, Ritschel LA, Lynn SJ, Cautin RL, Latzman RD (2015) Science–practice gap. Encycl Clin Psychol. doi:10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp566

    Google Scholar 

  • McGurk BJ, Carr MJ, McGurk D (1993) Investigative interviewing courses for police officers: an evaluation. Home Office Police Research Group

  • Mehdizadeh L, Sturrock A, Myers G, Khatib Y, Dacre J (2014) How well do doctors think they perform on the General Medical Council's Tests of Competence pilot examinations? A cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 4(2), e004131. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004131

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer JR, Reppucci ND (2007) Police practices and perceptions regarding juvenile interrogation and interrogative suggestibility. Behav Sci Law 25(6):757–780. doi:10.1002/bsl.774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patihis L, Ho LY, Tingen IW, Lilienfeld SO, Loftus EF (2014a) Are the “memory wars” over? A scientist-practitioner gap in beliefs about repressed memory. Psychol Sci 25(2):519–530. doi:10.1177/0956797613510718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patihis L, Lilienfeld SO, Ho LY, Loftus EF (2014b) Unconscious repressed memory is scientifically questionable. Psychol Sci [Commentary]

  • Redlich AD, Goodman GS (2003) Taking responsibility for an act not committed: Influence of age and suggestibility. Law Hum Behav 27:141–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts JV (2004) Public opinion and youth justice. Crime Justice 31:495–542, Retrieved from www.ebscohost.com

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw J, Woodworth M (2013) Are the misinformed more punitive? Beliefs and misconceptions in forensic psychology. Psychol Crime Law 19(8):687–706. doi:10.1080/1068316X.2013.793335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw J, Porter S, ten Brinke L (2013) Catching liars: training mental health and legal professionals to detect high-stakes lies. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol 24(2):145–159. doi:10.1080/14789949.2012.752025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shawyer A, Milne B, Bull R (2009) Investigative interviewing in the UK. In: Williamson T, Milne B, Savage S (eds) International developments in investigative interviewing, 24–38

  • Snook B (2008) Pseudoscientific policing practices. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1211–1214. doi:10.1177/0093854808321525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strömwall L, Granhag PA (2003) How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychol Crime Law 9(1):19–36. doi:10.1080/106831602100057659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavris C (2003) The widening scientist-practitioner gap: a view from the bridge. In: Lilienfeld SO, Lynn SJ, Lohr JM (eds) Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology. Guilford, New York, pp ix–xviii

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor AK, Kowalski P (2004) Naive psychological science: the prevalence, strength, and sources of misconceptions. Psychol Rec 54(1):15–25, Retrieved from: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/tpr/vol54/iss1/2

    Google Scholar 

  • Turtle J, Want S (2008) Logic and research versus intuition and past practice as guides to gathering and evaluating eyewitness evidence. Crim Justice Behav 35(10):1241–1256. doi:10.1177/0093854808321879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij A, Mann S (2001) Who killed my relative? Police officers' ability to detect real-life high-stake lies. Psychol Crime Law 7(1-4):119–132. doi:10.1080/10683160108401791

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Shaw.

Appendix

Appendix

Full set of counter-empirical beliefs from psycho-legal beliefs questionnaire, broken down by sub-scale. For background review of the literature supporting each of these statements as misconceived, please refer to Shaw and Woodworth 2013.

Police Interrogations and Procedures

  1. 1

    Good cop/Bad cop is an effective means of truth-seeking

  2. 2

    People are not good at detecting lying

  3. 3

    The ultimate goal of any interrogation should be gaining a confession

  4. 4

    People only confess when they have actually committed the crime they are being charged with

  5. 5

    Pressuring individuals to confess is the best way to find out the truth

  6. 6

    Police can tell when a suspect is lying

  7. 7

    When people lie, they look up and to the left

  8. 8

    Most police have received training on how to deal with mentally ill victims/offenders

  9. 9

    In-person lineups are the best way for police to narrow down a suspect

  10. 10

    Most guilty suspects do not lie in interrogations

Courts

  1. 1

    Eye-witnesses are always the most reliable source of case-related information

  2. 2

    Eye-witnesses are not the most important piece of evidence in most convictions

  3. 3

    Most Judges and Jurors fully understand court instructions

  4. 4

    Judges and Jurors are good at remembering all the details mentioned during a trial

  5. 5

    The Insanity Plea is typically used by offenders who are trying to avoid jail

  6. 6

    Judges are good at detecting deception

  7. 7

    DNA evidence is all that is needed to convict an individual, because it proves he/she was at the scene

  8. 8

    Incarcerated offenders usually have access to education while imprisoned

Mental Illness

  1. 1

    Most mentally ill individuals are violent

  2. 2

    Most individuals in incarcerated settings are mentally ill

  3. 3

    The courts know how to effectively deal with mentally ill suspects/victims

  4. 4

    All offenders have access to appropriate rehabilitation services

  5. 5

    Upon release, most offenders are provided with help they need to reintegrate into the community

  6. 6

    All Psychopaths are criminals

  7. 7

    All serial-killers are Psychopaths

  8. 8

    All imprisoned offenders have major mental disorders

Tough on Crime

  1. 1

    Sentencing offenders to Prison/Jail is a good way to punish them

  2. 2

    Individuals are less likely to offend again if they have been incarcerated in a prison/jail

  3. 3

    Imprisonment is the best way to deal with offenders

  4. 4

    Diversion to community service work instead of imprisonment is not good

  5. 5

    Individuals who are granted the insanity plea, and are mandated to treatment instead, are 'getting off easy'

  6. 6

    Most incarcerated offenders are reconvicted

  7. 7

    Threatening offenders with jail terms is an effective crime deterrent

  8. 8

    Capital Punishment (the death sentence) is not an effective way to deter criminal activity

  9. 9

    The way we currently deal with offenders is very good

  10. 10

    We need to be "tough on crime", by giving convicted felons harsher punishment

  11. 11

    The death penalty is an effective means of reducing local crime rates

  12. 12

    Severely mentally ill adult offenders should be treated judicially the same as minors

  13. 13

    Often, minors between the ages of 13-18 should beheld fully responsible for their actions

  14. 14

    Adult mentally ill suspects should be treated the same as normal suspects

Memory and Cognition

  1. 1

    Memory is like a video-camera

  2. 2

    All memory is better for exciting events

  3. 3

    People can have "photographic" memory

  4. 4

    If you are the victim of a violent crime, your memory for the perpetrators face will be perfect

  5. 5

    Only few individuals have bad memory

  6. 6

    When there is a gun present, victims are better at remembering the details of the event

  7. 7

    We never forget the source of our knowledge

  8. 8

    People cannot have memories of things that never actually happened

  9. 9

    We can typically remember things that we did not attend to

  10. 10

    Accurate memories of childhood sexual abuse usually arise years after the abuse

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chaplin, C., Shaw, J. Confidently Wrong: Police Endorsement of Psycho-Legal Misconceptions. J Police Crim Psych 31, 208–216 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-015-9182-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-015-9182-5

Keywords

Navigation