Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Confession During Police Interrogation: a Decision Tree Analysis

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

Abstract

Most studies of confession during police interrogation have looked at the influence of various individual factors on the prevalence and probability of confession, neglecting potential interactions between factors and the possibility of combined influence on the suspect’s decision to confess or not. To bridge this gap, the present study proposes using a profile-based approach, rather than the much more common variable-based approach, to analyze potential interaction effects, the hierarchical relationship between factors, and the relative weight of each profile/combinaisons of factors in the suspect’s decision-making process. The study is based on self-reported data from a sample of 211 inmates incarcerated in a Canadian federal penitentiary. Results highlight different profiles of factors that play a role in the decision-making process and in the prevalence of confession, particularly the importance of situational factors and the key role of the interrogators. Decisional profiles and the strength of significant factors are discussed in light of the current knowledge on confession and the practical implication of the results for police interrogations is examined. The relevance of decision tree analyses for the field of investigative interviewing is discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. These five obstacles are integrated into the Gudjonsson Confession Questionnaire developed by Gudjonsson and Sigurdsson (1999).

  2. Note that in this article, the term “profiles” refers to combinations/configurations of factors that interact in order to better “predict” the dependent variable under study, not to profiles of individuals in the more traditional sense of the term (e.g., profiles from a “typology” as would be the case using latent class analyses).

  3. For obvious reasons, given the self-revealed nature of the data and the potential for memory loss, participants were contacted shortly after their admission to the penitentiary. For more information on this subject, see Deslauriers-Varin et al. 2011b.

  4. Reliability was calculated for this subsample using Krippendorff’s alpha (Hayes and Krippendorff 2007) for each of the variables on which information was contained in the institutional records. The coefficients obtained ranged between 0.55 and 1.00, with a mean of 0.81.

  5. For reasons of logistics and parsimony, this scale was distributed and completed by about half of the sample (n = 126, 54.8%) and was used to assess, given the self-report nature of the study, to what extent the information provided might reflect a tendency for individuals to provide more socially desirable responses. Correlation analyses had been carried out previously to measure the influence of social desirability on the various variables under study. Two of the correlations between the scores on the social desirability scale and the independent variables were statistically significant: age (r = 0.29, p < 0.01) and civil status (r = 0.23, p < 0.05). This suggests that older inmates and those in a relationship during the time of the police interrogation tended to respond according to socially valued behaviors. No other significant relationship was observed between the study variables and the score on the desirability scale, including the dependent variable under study (decision to confess or not during the interview). For more information, see Deslauriers-Varin et al. 2011b.

  6. Frequency distribution and type of crime for each point on the scale was (12) homicide, 6.5%; (11) sexual assault, 13.8%; (10) robbery, 23.5%; (9) kidnapping/forcible confinement, 0.5%; (8) assault, 10.1%; (7) arson, 2.3%; (6) break and enter, 18.4%; (5) auto theft, 0.5%; (4) drug offences, 20.3%; (3) fraud, 1.8%; (2) theft, 2.3%; (1) vandalism, 0.0%.

  7. Given the retrospective nature of the study, it is difficult to know with certainty whether this perception captures their perceptions at the time of the investigative interview or if it stems from perceptions acquired during the judicial process or following their conviction.

  8. This variable was originally coded on a 4-point scale (0 = Very weak; 1 = Fairly weak; 2 = Fairly strong; 3 = Very strong). Since using this variable in both 2- and 4-point format gave similar results, it was decided to keep this variable in a dichotomous format.

  9. The use of the term “explanatory” rather than “motivational” factors is used throughout the article to better reflect the retrospective nature of the study.

  10. Note that analyses were also performed using only factors found to be statistically significant in step 1. However, the results for this parsimonious model were identical to those for the full model. Given the purpose of this study, it was therefore decided to present only the results for the full model.

  11. Hence, the use of the term “explanatory” rather than “motivational” factors.

References

  • Abbe A, Brandon SE (2013) The role of rapport in investigative interviewing: a review. J Investig Psychol Offender Profiling 10(3):237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alison LJ, Alison E, Noone G, Elntib S, Christiansen P (2013) Why tough tactics fail and rapport gets results: Observing Rapport-Based Interpersonal Techniques (ORBIT) to generate useful information from terrorists. Psychol Public Policy Law 19(4):411–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleby SC, Hasel LE, Kassin SM (2013) Police-induced confessions: an empirical analysis of their content and impact. Psychology, Crime and Law 19(2):111–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin J (1993) Police interview technique: establishing truth or proof? Br J Criminol 33(3):325–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauregard E, Deslauriers-Varin N, St-Yves M (2010) Interactions between factors related to the decision of sex offenders to confess during police interrogation: a classification-tree approach. Sex Abuse-J Res Tr 22(3):343–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergeron A, Deslauriers-Varin N (2020) Obstacles à la confession : Exploration des profils explicatifs de la non-confession en contexte d’interrogatoire policier [Barriers to Confession: Exploring Explanatory Profiles of Non-confession in Police Interrogation]. Revue Internationale De Criminologie Et De Police Technique Et Scientifique 72:387–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Berggren E (1975) The psychology of confessions. Leiden: Brill.

  • Blair JP (2006) The roles of interrogation, perception, and individual differences in producing compliant false confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law 13:173–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blais MR, Lachance L, Richer S (1991) Validation de la version française de la mesure de désirabilité sociale de Crowne et Marlowe [Validation of the French version of Crowne and Marlowe’s social desirability scale] (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, Quebec

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein A, Cohen J, Roth JA, Visher C (1986) Criminal careers and “career criminals.” (Vols. 1–2). Washington, DC: National Academy Press

  • Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Brimbal L, Luke TJ (2019) Deconstructing the evidence: the effects of strength and reliability of evidence on suspect behavior and counter-interrogation tactics. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vrs7z

  • Cassell PG (1996) Miranda’s social costs: an empirical reassessment. Northwest Univ Law Rev 90:387–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemens F, Knieps M, Tekin S (2020) Untapped potential? A survey study with German police officers into suspect interviewing practices and the strategic use of evidence. J Forensic Psychol Res Pract 20:53–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowne DP, Marlowe D (1960) A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J Consult Psychol 24:349–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deslauriers-Varin N, Beauregard E, Wong J (2011a) Changing their mind about confessing to police: the role of contextual factors in crime confession. Police Q 14:5–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deslauriers-Varin N, Bennell C, Bergeron A (2018) Criminal investigation of sexual violence and abuse. In P. Lussier et E. Beauregard (Eds.). Sexual offending: a criminological perspective (p. 299–325). Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge

  • Deslauriers-Varin N, Lussier P, St-Yves M (2011b) Confessing their crime: factors influencing the offender’s decision to confess to the police. Justice Q 28:113–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood J, Watkins K (2021) Psychological persuasion in suspect interviews: Reid, PEACE, and pathways forward. Investigative Interviewing: Research and Practice 11:54–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman-Delahunty J, Martschuk N (2020) Securing reliable information in investigative interviews: coercive and noncoercive strategies preceding turning points. Police Pract Res Int J 21:152–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag PA, Strömwall LA, Willén RM, Hartwig M (2013) Eliciting cues to deception by tactical disclosure of evidence: the first test of the evidence framing matrix. Leg Criminol Psychol 18:341–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson GH (1992) The psychology of false confessions. New Law Journal 142:1277–1278

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson GH (2003) The psychology of interrogations and confessions. A handbook. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson GH, Petursson H (1991) Custodial interrogation: why do suspects confess and how does it relate to their crime, attitude and personality? Personality Individ Differ 12(3):295–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson GH, Sigurdsson JF (1999) The Gudjonsson Confession Questionnaire- Revised (GCQ-R): factor structure and its relationship with personality. Personality Individ Differ 27(5):953–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson GH, Sigurdsson JF, Einarsson E (2004) The role of personality in relation to confessions and denials. Psychology, Crime & Law 10(2):125–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes HF, Krippendorff K (2007) Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Commun Methods Meas 1:77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilgendorf EL, Irving B (1981) A decision-making model of confessions. In: Lloyd-Bostock MA (ed) Psychology in legal contexts: applications and limitations. MacMillan, London, pp 67–84

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg U, Christianson SA (2002) Murderers’ and sexual offenders’ experiences of police interviews and their inclination to admit or deny crimes. Behav Sci Law 20(1–2):31–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogesteyn K, Meijer EH, Vrij A, Merckelbach H (2018) Improving the disclosure of information in an investigative interview: rapport building and the physical environment. In-Mind Magazine 4(36)

  • Horgan AJ, Russano MB, Meissner CA, Evans JR (2012) Minimization and maximization techniques: assessing the perceived consequences of confessing and confession diagnosticity. Psychology, Crime, & Law 18:65–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz MW (1956) The psychology of confession. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 47(2):197–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inbau FE, Reid JE, Buckley JP, Jayne BC (2001) Criminal interrogation and confession (4th ed.). Gaithersburg Aspen

  • Jayne BC (1986) The psychological principles of criminal interrogation: an appendix. In: Imbau FE, Reid JE, Buckley JP, Jayne BC (eds) Criminal interrogation and confession, 3rd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 327–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass GV (1980) An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. J Roy Stat Soc 29(2):119–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassin SM, Leo RA, Meissner CA, Richman KD, Colwell LH, Leach AM et al (2007) Police interviewing and interrogation: a self-report survey of police practices and beliefs. Law Hum Behav 31:381–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kassin SM, Neumann K (1997) On the power of confession evidence: an experimental test of the fundamental difference hypothesis. Law Hum Behav 21(5):469–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kebbell M, Alison L, Hurren Paterson E, Mazerolle P (2010) How do sex offenders think the police should interview to elicit confessions from sex offenders? Psychology, Crime and Law 16(7):567–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khasin I (2009) Honesty is the best policy: a case for the limitation of deceptive police interrogation strategies in the United States. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 42:1029–1061

    Google Scholar 

  • Leahy-Harland S, Bull R (2017) Police strategies and suspect responses in real-life serious crime interviews. J Police Crim Psychol 32(2):138–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leo RA (1996) Inside the interrogation room. J Crim Law Criminol 86:266–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald JM, Michaud DL (1987) The confession: interrogation and criminal profiles for police officers. Apache Press, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  • McConville M (1993) Corroboration and confessions. The impact of a rule requiring that no conviction can be sustained on the basis of confession evidence alone. The Royal Commission on Criminal Justice Research Study No. 36. London: HMSO

  • Meissner CA, Surmon-Böhr F, Oleszkiewicz S, Alison LJ (2017) Developing an evidence-based perspective on interrogation: a review of the US government’s high- value detainee interrogation group research program. Psychol Public Policy Law 23:438–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner CA, Redlich AD, Michael SW, Evans JR, Camilletti CR, Bhatt S, Brandon S (2014) Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: a meta-analytic review. J Exp Criminol 10(4):459–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Méndez JE (2021) Principles on effective interviewing for investigations and information gathering (The Méndez principles). https://www.apt.ch/en/resources/publications/new-principles-effective-interviewing-investigations-and-information

  • Moston S, Engelberg T (2011) The effects of evidence on the outcome of interviews with criminal suspects. Police Pract Res Int J 12:518–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moston SJ, Stephenson GM (1994) Predictors of suspect and interviewer behavior during police questioning. In: Losel F, Bender D, Bliesener T (eds) Psychology and law: international perspective (pp=. De Gruyter, Berlin, pp 212–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Moston S, Stephenson GM, Williamson TM (1992) The effects of case characteristics on suspect behaviour during police questioning. Br J Criminol 32(1):23–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narchet FM, Meissner CA, Russano MB (2011) Modeling the influence of investigator bias on the elicitation of true and false confessions. Law Hum Behav 35:452–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pearse J, Gudjonsson GH (1999) Measuring influential police interviewing tactics: a factor analytic approach. Leg Criminol Psychol 4:221–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearse J, Gudjonsson GH, Clare ICH, Rutter S (1998) Police interviewing and psychological vulnerabilities: predicting the likelihood of a confession. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 8(1):1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips C, Brown D (1998) Entry into the criminal justice system: a survey of police arrests and their outcomes. Home Office, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Reik T (1959) The compulsion to confess. Farrar, Straus, and Cudahy, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandham A, Dando CJ, Bull R, Ormerod T (2020) Improving professional observers’ veracity judgments by tactical interviewing. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-020-09391-1

  • Sigurdsson JF, Gudjonsson GH (1994) Alcohol and drug intoxication during police interrogation and the reasons why suspects confess to the police. Addiction 89(8):985–997

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silver E, Chow-Martin L (2002) A multiple models approach to assessing recidivism risk. Crim Justice Behav 29(5):538–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snook B, Barron T, Fallon L, Kassin SM, Kleinman S, Leo RA, Meissner C, Morello L, Nirider L, Redlich A, Trainum J (2020) Urgent issues and prospects in reinforcing interrogation practices in the United States and Canada. Leg Criminol Psychol 26(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snook B, Brooks D, Bull R (2015) A lesson on interrogations from detainees: predicting self-reported confessions and cooperation. Crim Justice Behav 42(12):1243–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snook B, Eastwood J, Stinson M, Tedeschini J, House JC (2010) Reforming investigative interviewing in Canada. Can J Criminol Crim Justice 52(2):215–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song YY, Lu Y (2015) Decision tree methods: applications for classification and prediction. Shanghai Arch Psychiatry 27(2):130–135

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Soukara S, Bull R, Vrij A, Turner M, Cherryman J (2009) What really happens in police interviews with suspects? Tactics and confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law 15(6):493–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steadman HJ, Silver E, Monahan J, Appelbaum P, Robbins PC, Mulvey EP, Banks S (2000) A classification tree approach to the development of actuarial violence risk assessment tools. Law Hum Behav 24(1):83–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson GM, Moston SJ (1994) Police interrogation. Psychology, Crime, and Law 1(2):151–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahan R, Gerbasi KC (1972) Short, homogenous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. J Clin Psychol 28:191–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St-Yves M (2002) Police interrogation and sexual crime: profile of the collaborating suspect. Revue Internationale De Criminologie Et De Police Technique Et Scientifique 1:81–96

    Google Scholar 

  • St-Yves M (2014) Rapport in investigative interviews: five fundamental rules to achieve it. In M. St-Yves (Ed.), Investigative interviewing - the essentials (pp. 1–28). Cowansville: Yvon Blais

  • St-Yves M, Deslauriers-Varin N (2009) The Psychology of Suspects’ Decision-Making During Interrogation. Williamson, T. & Bull, R. (eds.), Handbook of Psychology of Investigative Interviewing. Current Developments and Future Directions. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell

  • St-Yves M, Deslauriers-Varin N (2019) Les entrevues d’enquête [Investigative Interviewing]. In M. Cusson, O. Ribaux, E. Blais & M. M. Raynaud (eds.). Nouveau traité de sécurité. Montreal, QC: Hurtubise

  • St-Yves M, Kebbell M (2018) Investigative interviewing in suspected sexual homicides. In: Proulx J, Beauregard E, Carter AJ, Mokros A, Darjee R, James J (eds) Routledge international handbook of sexual homicide studies. Routledge, Oxon, pp 562–573

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • St-Yves M, Meissner C (2014) Interviewing suspects. In M. St-Yves (Ed.), In M. St-Yves (Ed.), Investigative interviewing - the essentials (pp. 145–190). Cowansville: Yvon Blais

  • Ture M, Tokatli F, Kurt I (2009) Using Kaplan-Meier analysis together with decision tree methods (C&R, CHAID, QUEST, C4.5 and ID3) in determining recurrence-free survival of breast cancer patients. Expert Systems with Applications 36(2):2017–2026

  • Vanderhallen M, Vervaeke G, Holmberg U (2011) Witness and suspect perceptions of working alliance and interviewing style. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 8(2):110–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viljoen JL, Klaver J, Roesch R (2005) Legal decisions made by preadolescent and adolescent defendants: predictors of confessions, pleas, appeals, and communication with attorneys. Law Hum Behav 29(3):253–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wachi T, Kuraishi H, Watanabe K, Otsuka Y, Yokota K, Lamb ME (2018) Effects of rapport building on confessions in an experimental paradigm. Psychol Public Policy Law 24(1):36–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wachi T, Watanabe K, Yokota K, Otsuka Y, Kuraishi H, Lamb M (2014) Police interviewing styles and confessions in Japan. Psychology, Crime & Law 20(7):673–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westera NJ, Kebbell MR (2014) Investigative interviewing in suspected sex offences. In: Bull R (ed) Investigative interviewing. Springer, New York, New York, pp 1–18

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Work and Criminology, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada

    Nadine Deslauriers-Varin

  2. Centre International de Criminologie Comparé, Quebec, Canada

    Nadine Deslauriers-Varin

Authors
  1. Nadine Deslauriers-Varin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadine Deslauriers-Varin.

Ethics declarations

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A French version of this article was previously published in Criminologie, vol. 53, no 2 (2020).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deslauriers-Varin, N. Confession During Police Interrogation: a Decision Tree Analysis. J Police Crim Psych 37, 526–539 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09507-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09507-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation