Videotaped interrogations and confessions: does a dual-camera approach yield unbiased and accurate evaluations?

Although an equal-focus camera perspective-suspect and interrogator each displayed in profile-produces relatively unbiased assessments of videotaped interrogations-confessions, many in law enforcement may consider it less than satisfactory because a full-face view of the suspect is precluded and thus potentially important information revealed in his or her expressions may be unavailable for fact finders' consideration. The present research investigated whether a dual-camera approach, wherein the full faces of both the suspect and interrogator are presented in a split-screen format simultaneously, is a viable alternative to an equal-focus format. Experiment 1 in fact demonstrated that the dual-camera approach does produce relatively unbiased assessments of voluntariness and guilt. However, Experiment 2 revealed that the dual-camera approach was one of the poorest presentation formats in terms of its impact on the ability to accurately distinguish between true and false confessions. Policy recommendations based on the present and previous research are presented.

Camera perspective bias in videotaped confessions: experimental evidence of its perceptual basis.

The camera perspective from which a criminal confession is videotaped influences later assessments of its voluntariness and the suspect's guilt. Previous research has suggested that this camera perspective bias is rooted in perceptual rather than conceptual processes, but these data are strictly correlational. In 3 experiments, the authors directly manipulated perceptual processing to provide stronger evidence of its mediational role. Prior to viewing a videotape of a simulated confession, participants were shown a photograph of the confessor's apparent victim. Participants in a perceptual interference condition were instructed to visualize the image of the victim in their minds while viewing the videotape; participants in a conceptual interference condition were instructed instead to rehearse an 8-digit number. Because mental imagery and actual perception draw on the same available resources, the authors anticipated that the former, but not the latter, interference task would disrupt the camera perspective bias, if indeed it were perceptually mediated. Results supported this conclusion.

Gender differences in attitudes toward gay men and lesbians: the role of motivation to respond without prejudice.

Research has uncovered consistent gender differences in attitudes toward gay men, with women expressing less prejudice than men (Herek, 2003). Attitudes toward lesbians generally show a similar pattern, but to a weaker extent. The present work demonstrated that motivation to respond without prejudice importantly contributes to these divergent attitudes. Study 1 revealed that women evince higher internal motivation to respond without prejudice (IMS, Plant & Devine, 1998) than do men and that this difference partially mediates the relationship between gender and attitudes toward gay men. The second study replicated this finding and demonstrated that IMS mediates the relationship between gender and attitudes toward lesbians. Study 2 further revealed that gender-role variables contribute to the observed gender differences in motivation to respond without prejudice. These findings provide new insights into the nature of sexual prejudice and for the first time point to possible antecedents of variation in motivation to respond without prejudice.