Beliefs about secondary confession evidence: a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys

Kylie N. Key; Jeffrey S. Neuschatz; Brian H. Bornstein; Stacy A. Wetmore; Katie M. Luecht; Kimberly S. Dellapaolera; Deah S. Quinlivan

doi:10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968

Beliefs about secondary confession evidence: a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys

Kylie N. Key, Jeffrey S. Neuschatz, Brian H. Bornstein, Stacy A. Wetmore, Katie M. Luecht, Kimberly S. Dellapaolera, Deah S. Quinlivan

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

We surveyed students, community members, and defense attorneys regarding beliefs about secondary confession evidence (i.e. when a third party tells authorities that a person has confessed to him or her) from jailhouse informants and other sources. Results indicated that laypeople perceive secondary confessions as less credible than other types of evidence (e.g. forensics, DNA, eyewitness testimony), and they are knowledgeable about factors that may influence the veracity of secondary confessions, such as incentives or previous testimony. However, they underestimated or were uncertain about how persuasive secondary confessions would be to themselves or other jurors. Compared to laypeople, defense attorneys were more sensitive about issues affecting the reliability of secondary confessions.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1-13
Number of pages	13
Journal	Psychology, Crime and Law
Volume	24
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968
State	Published - Jan 2 2018
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

defense attorneys
incentives
jailhouse informants
juror perceptions
Secondary confessions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Pathology and Forensic Medicine
General Psychology
Law

Access to Document

10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968

Cite this

@article{60b7d21d10da47fd9f6dbf81c626998f,

title = "Beliefs about secondary confession evidence: a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys",

abstract = "We surveyed students, community members, and defense attorneys regarding beliefs about secondary confession evidence (i.e. when a third party tells authorities that a person has confessed to him or her) from jailhouse informants and other sources. Results indicated that laypeople perceive secondary confessions as less credible than other types of evidence (e.g. forensics, DNA, eyewitness testimony), and they are knowledgeable about factors that may influence the veracity of secondary confessions, such as incentives or previous testimony. However, they underestimated or were uncertain about how persuasive secondary confessions would be to themselves or other jurors. Compared to laypeople, defense attorneys were more sensitive about issues affecting the reliability of secondary confessions.",

keywords = "defense attorneys, incentives, jailhouse informants, juror perceptions, Secondary confessions",

author = "Key, {Kylie N.} and Neuschatz, {Jeffrey S.} and Bornstein, {Brian H.} and Wetmore, {Stacy A.} and Luecht, {Katie M.} and Dellapaolera, {Kimberly S.} and Quinlivan, {Deah S.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.",

year = "2018",

month = jan,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "24",

pages = "1--13",

journal = "Psychology, Crime and Law",

issn = "1068-316X",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beliefs about secondary confession evidence

T2 - a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys

AU - Key, Kylie N.

AU - Neuschatz, Jeffrey S.

AU - Bornstein, Brian H.

AU - Wetmore, Stacy A.

AU - Luecht, Katie M.

AU - Dellapaolera, Kimberly S.

AU - Quinlivan, Deah S.

PY - 2018/1/2

Y1 - 2018/1/2

N2 - We surveyed students, community members, and defense attorneys regarding beliefs about secondary confession evidence (i.e. when a third party tells authorities that a person has confessed to him or her) from jailhouse informants and other sources. Results indicated that laypeople perceive secondary confessions as less credible than other types of evidence (e.g. forensics, DNA, eyewitness testimony), and they are knowledgeable about factors that may influence the veracity of secondary confessions, such as incentives or previous testimony. However, they underestimated or were uncertain about how persuasive secondary confessions would be to themselves or other jurors. Compared to laypeople, defense attorneys were more sensitive about issues affecting the reliability of secondary confessions.

AB - We surveyed students, community members, and defense attorneys regarding beliefs about secondary confession evidence (i.e. when a third party tells authorities that a person has confessed to him or her) from jailhouse informants and other sources. Results indicated that laypeople perceive secondary confessions as less credible than other types of evidence (e.g. forensics, DNA, eyewitness testimony), and they are knowledgeable about factors that may influence the veracity of secondary confessions, such as incentives or previous testimony. However, they underestimated or were uncertain about how persuasive secondary confessions would be to themselves or other jurors. Compared to laypeople, defense attorneys were more sensitive about issues affecting the reliability of secondary confessions.

KW - defense attorneys

KW - incentives

KW - jailhouse informants

KW - juror perceptions

KW - Secondary confessions

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026871294&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026871294&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968

DO - 10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351968

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85026871294

SN - 1068-316X

VL - 24

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Psychology, Crime and Law

JF - Psychology, Crime and Law

IS - 1

ER -

Beliefs about secondary confession evidence: a survey of laypeople and defense attorneys

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this