Confessions Selected by Consequences: An Operant Analysis of False Confessions and Interrogation Techniques

  • Haven NilandEmail author
  • Daniele Ortu
Original Paper


Documented cases of innocent persons in the United States having confessed to crimes that they did not commit have become commonplace since the emergence of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing as a means for confirming a person’s innocence or guilt. The risk of imprisoning any more innocent individuals on the basis of false confessions warrants a closer look at the contingencies that give rise to this kind of tragedy. Using Skinner’s (1957, Verbal Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall) and Palmer’s (1991, “A Behavioral Interpretation of Memory,” in L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase [Eds.], Dialogues on Verbal Behavior [pp. 261–279], Reno, NV: Context Press) analyses of verbal behavior and memory, this article explores how verbal episodes between suspects and law enforcement can culminate in a false admission of guilt. In addition, to try to identify the variables that might lead to high rates of false confessions in the United States, this article examines some of the contingencies under which law enforcement investigations operate. Finally, we provide some recommendations for how the behavior analyst can fulfill the role of an expert witness, how to take into consideration a systemic and cultural perspective, and how to incorporate some technological safeguards and additional precautions when interacting with vulnerable populations.


false confessions mnemonic behavior interrogation coercion intraverbal control verbal behavior 



Daniele Ortu is funded by the Beatrice H. Barrett Research Endowment, Department of Behavior Analysis, University of North Texas.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the authors.


  1. Bang, B. L., Stanton, D., Hemmens, C., & Stohr, M. K. (2018). Police recording of custodial interrogations: A state-by-state legal inquiry. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 20(1), 3–18. Scholar
  2. Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 139-140 (1968).Google Scholar
  3. (1994). Aerial photos. Retrieved from Accessed 1 Dec 2018.
  4. Cappellino, A. (2018, July). Daubert vs. Frye: Navigating the standards of admissibility for expert testimony. The Expert Institute. Retrieved from
  5. Catania, A. C. (1998). Learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895).Google Scholar
  7. Crosbie, J. (1998). Negative reinforcement and punishment. In K. A. Lattal & M. Perone (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 163–189). Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crowe v. County of San Diego, 9 S. Ct. (2010).Google Scholar
  9. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).Google Scholar
  10. Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1993). Learning and complex behavior (1st ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  11. Fantino, E. (1998). Behavior analysis and decision making. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3, 355–364. Scholar
  12. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).Google Scholar
  13. Fulero, S. (2004). Expert psychological testimony on the psychology of interrogations and confessions. In G. D. Lassiter (Ed.), Interrogations, confessions, and entrapment (pp. 247–263). Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaffan, D. (2002). Against memory systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 357(1424), 1111–1121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garrett, B. L. (2011). Convicting the innocent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garrett, B. L. (2015). Contaminated confessions revisited. Virginia Law Review, 101(2), 395–454.Google Scholar
  17. Glenn, S. S. (1989). Verbal behavior and cultural practices. Behavior Analysis and Social Action, 7(1–2), 10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glenn, S. S., Malott, M. E., Andery, M. A. P. A., Benvenuti, M., Houmanfar, R. A., Sandaker, I., et al. (2016). Toward consistent terminology in a behaviorist approach to cultural analysis. Behavior and Social Issues, 25, 1–27. Scholar
  19. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Pearse, J. (2011). Suspect interviews and false confessions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 33–37. Scholar
  20. Guerin, B. (1992). Behavior analysis and the social construction of knowledge. American Psychologist, 47(11), 1423–1432. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gupta, B. S., & Shukla, A. P. (1989). Verbal operant conditioning as a function of extraversion and reinforcement. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 39–44. Scholar
  22. Han, S., & Dobbins, I. G. (2009). Regulating recognition decisions through incremental reinforcement learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(3), 469–474. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harris, M. (1979). Cultural materialism. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
  24. The Innocence Project. (2017). DNA exonerations in the United States. Retrieved from Accessed 1 Dec 2018.
  25. John E. Reid & Associates. (2018). Training courses on the Reid Technique of interviewing and interrogation. Retrieved from
  26. John E. Reid & Associates. (2019, January). Classifying misrepresentations about law enforcement interrogation techniques. Retrieved from
  27. Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (2009). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Jolliffe, C., & Nicholas, M. (2004). Verbally reinforcing pain reports: An experimental test of the operant model of chronic pain. Pain, 107, 167–175. Scholar
  29. Kassin, S. M., Appleby, S. C., & Perillo, J. T. (2011). Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 39–55. Scholar
  30. Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 49–52. Scholar
  31. Koppl, R., & Sacks, M. (2013). The criminal justice system creates incentives for false confessions. Criminal Justice Ethics, 32, 1226–1162. Scholar
  32. Kozinski, W. (2018). The Reid interrogation technique and false confessions: A time for change. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 16(2), 301–345.Google Scholar
  33. Leo, R. A. (2008). Police interrogation and American justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leo, R. A. (2009). False confessions: Causes, consequences, and implications. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 37(3), 332–343.Google Scholar
  35. Leo, R. A., & Ofshe, R. J. (1998). The consequences of false confessions: Deprivations of liberty and miscarriages of justice in the age of psychological interrogation. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 88, 429–539. Scholar
  36. Leo, R. A., & Ofshe, R. J. (2008). The decision to confess falsely: Rational choice and irrational action. Denver University Law Review, 74(1997), 979-1122.Google Scholar
  37. Lindsley, O. R. (1991). From technical jargon to plain English for application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(3), 449. Scholar
  38. Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 585–589. Scholar
  39. Mazur, J. E. (2016). Learning and behavior (8th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Merryman, B. B. (2010). Arguments against use of the Reid Technique for juvenile interrogations. Communication Law Review, 10(2), 16–29.Google Scholar
  41. Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative stimuli and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155. Scholar
  42. Michael, J., Palmer, D. C., & Sundberg, M. L. (2011). The multiple control of verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27(1), 3–22. Scholar
  43. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).Google Scholar
  44. Misskelley, J. L. (1993, June 3). Interviewed by Detective B. Ridge and Detective G. Gitchell [Tape recording]. Suspect Interview, West Memphis Police Department, West Memphis, Arkansas.Google Scholar
  45. Misskelley v. Arkansas, 323 Ark. 449, 915 S.W.2d 702 (1996).Google Scholar
  46. Newkirk Center for Science and Society at the University of California Irvine, the University of Michigan Law School, and Michigan State University College of Law. (2019). Ronald Jones. The National Registry of Exonerations. Retrieved from
  47. Ofshe, R. A., & Leo, R. J. (1997). The social psychology of police interrogation: The theory and classification of true and false confessions. Studies in Law, Politics and Society, 16, 189–251.Google Scholar
  48. Ofshe, R. J. (n.d.). Declaration of Richard Ofshe. Retrieved from Accessed 1 March 2019.
  49. Ortu, D., Becker, A. M., Woelz, T. A. R., & Glenn, S. S. (2012). An iterated four-player prisoner’s dilemma game with an external selecting agent: A metacontingency experiment. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 44(1), 111–120.Google Scholar
  50. Ortu, D., & Cihon, T. M. (2019). A neuro-operant analysis of mnemonic recognition. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42, 267–281. Scholar
  51. Palmer, D. C. (1991). A behavioral interpretation of memory. In L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 261–279). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  52. Palmer, D. C. (2009). Response strength and the concept of the repertoire. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 10(1), 49–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Palmer, D. C. (2016). On intraverbal control and the definition of the intraverbal. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 32, 96–106. Scholar
  54. Peterson, J. L. (1997, February 18). Interviewed by Detective Sergeant G. Somers and Sargent D. Heymes [Tape recording]. Suspect Interview, Geraldine Montgomery Homicide Investigation, Kalkaska Police Department, Kalkaska, Michigan.Google Scholar
  55. Reynolds, B. (2006). A review of delay-discounting research with humans: Relations to drug use and gambling. Behavioural Pharmacology, 17(8), 651–667. Scholar
  56. Shepard, R. N. (1967). Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6(1), 156–163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sidman, M. (1988). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental data in psychology.  Boston, MA: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  58. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(1), 137–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Thomas Jefferson School of Law. (2017). The West Memphis three and their Alford Plea. Retrieved from
  61. University of Virginia School of Law. (2019). DNA exonerations database. Retrieved from
  62. Vaidya, M., Hudgins, C. D., & Ortu, D. (2015). Conditional discriminations, symmetry, and semantic priming. Behavioral Processes, 118, 90–97. Scholar
  63. Watkins, M. J. (1990). Mediationism and the obfuscation of memory. American Psychologist, 45(3), 328. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Behavior AnalysisUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations