OBJECTIVE Interested adults, such as parents and attorneys, may pose as safeguards against juveniles' vulnerabilities during custodial interrogations; yet, the trial-level ramifications of their presence are unknown. The current research examined mock jurors' perceptions and case decisions after they read about disputed juvenile confession evidence elicited in the presence of an interested adult. HYPOTHESES We hypothesized that when reading about a voluntary confession (vs. coerced or none), participants would be more likely to convict, find the defendant vulnerable, and view his interrogation less negatively. When an interested adult (parent or attorney) was present, we anticipated an increase in convictions, lower vulnerability perceptions, and less negative views of the interrogation, and especially so when the adult encouraged the juvenile to speak. METHOD Jury-eligible participants in Study 1 (N = 435) and Study 2 (N = 673) read a case about a 15-year-old male charged with murder and then completed a post case questionnaire. We manipulated confession type (coerced, voluntary, none) in both studies, interested adult's mere presence (parent, attorney, no adult) in Study 1, and adult advice (parent/attorney prompting the defendant to keep quiet or speak) in Study 2. RESULTS Overall, findings demonstrated higher conviction rates when there was a voluntary confession (vs. coerced or none). Study 1 revealed that a parent's or attorney's presence inflated conviction rates, and Study 2 demonstrated that adults' advice did not affect convictions or perceptions. CONCLUSIONS Interested adults' presence during juvenile interrogations seems to legitimize confession evidence instead of protecting juveniles at the trial level. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

在少年审讯后模拟陪审员的看法和案件判决：调查感兴趣的成年人的角色和口供类型。

目的感兴趣的成年人，例如父母和律师，可能构成防范少年在审讯期间易受伤害的保障；但是，它们的存在的试验级后果尚不清楚。当前的研究调查了模拟陪审员在有兴趣的成年人在场的情况下引起的有争议的少年自白证据后的看法和案件判决。假设我们假设，当阅读有关自愿供认（相对于强迫还是不强迫）时，参与者更有可能被定罪，发现被告容易受害并且对他的讯问的负面评价也较小。当有兴趣的成年人（父母或律师）在场时，我们预计定罪的人数会增加，对脆弱性的看法会降低，对审讯的负面看法也会减少，特别是当成年人鼓励少年说话时。方法研究1（N = 435）和研究2（N = 673）有陪审团资格的参与者阅读了一起有关一名15岁男性被谋杀的案例，然后填写了事后问卷。我们在两项研究中都操纵了坦白类型（强迫，自愿，无），在研究1中只关注了成年人的存在（父母，律师，没有成年人），在研究2中提出了成人建议（父母/律师促使被告保持安静或说话）。结果总的来说，当有自愿供认时（相对于强迫或无供认），调查结果显示出较高的定罪率。研究1显示，父母或律师的在场会提高定罪率，研究2表明，成年人的建议不会影响定罪或看法。结论感兴趣的成年人 在少年审讯期间的存在似乎使认罪证据合法化，而不是在审判阶段保护少年。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。