Attributional complexity and the camera perspective bias in videotaped confessions

Basic and Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 27-35

  Lassiter, G Daniel ^a   Munhall, Patrick J ^a   Berger, Ian P ^a   Weiland, Paul E ^b   Handley, Ian M ^c   Geers, Andrew L ^b  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 16244391777     PISSN: 01973533     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324834basp2701_3     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Briggs, M. A., & Lassiter, G. D. (1994). More evidence for the robustness of salience effects. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 171-180.
2. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.
3. Cohen, C. E., & Ebbesen E. B. (1979). Observational goals and schema activation: A theoretical framework for behavior perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 305-329.
4. Devine, P. G. (1989). Overattribution effect: The role of confidence and attributional complexity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52, 149-158.
5. Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571.
6. Ellsworth, P. (1993). Some steps between attitudes and verdicts. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 42-64). New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Fletcher, G. J. O., Danilovics, P., Fernandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G. D. (1986). Attributional complexity: An individual differences measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 875-884.
8. Fletcher, G. J. O., Reeder, G. D., & Bull, V. (1990). Bias and accuracy in attitude attribution: The role of attributional complexity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 275-288.
9. Fletcher, G. J. O., Rosanowski, J., Rhodes, D., & Lange, C. (1992). Accuracy and speed of causal processing: Experts versus novices in social judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 320-338.
10. Fiett, G. L., Pliner, P., & Blankstein, K.R. (1989). Depression and components of attributional complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 757-764.
11. Geller, W. A. (1992). Police videotaping of suspect interrogations and confessions: A preliminary examination of issues and practices (A report to the National Institute of Justice). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
12. Hamilton, D. L., Katz. L. B., & Leirer, V. O. (1980). Cognitive representation of personality impressions: Organizational processes in first impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1050-1063.
13. Innocence Project. (2001). Retrieved June 24, 2004, from http://www.innocenceproject.org/.
14. Kassin, S. M., & Sukel, H. (1997). Coerced confessions and the jury: An experimental test of the "harmless error" rule. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 27-46.
15. Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1985). Confession evidence. In S. Kassin & L. Wrightsman (Eds.), The psychology of evidence and trial procedure (pp. 67-94). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16. Lassiter, G. D. (2002). Illusory causation in the courtroom. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 204-208.
17. Lassiter, G. D. (2004). Interrogations, confessions, and entrapment. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
18. Lassiter, G. D., Geers, A. L., Munhall, P. J., Handley, I. M., & Beers, M. J. (2001). Videotaped confessions: Is guilt in the eye of the camera? In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 33, pp. 189-254). New York: Academic.
19. Lassiter, G. D., Geers, A. L., Munhall, P. J., Ploutz-Snyder, R. J., & Breitenbecher, D. L. (2002). Illusory causation: Why it occurs. Psychological Science, 13, 299-305.
20. Lassiter, G. D., & Irvine, A. A. (1986). Videotaped confessions: The impact of camera point of view on judgments of coercion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 268-276.
21. Lassiter, G. D., Slaw, R. D., Briggs, M. A., & Scanlan, C. R. (1992). The potential for bias in videotaped confessions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1838-1851.
22. Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255-275.
23. Massad, C. M., Hubbard, M., & Newtson, D. (1979). Selective perception of events. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 513-532.
24. McArthur, L. Z. (1980). Illusory causation and illusory correlation: Two epistemological accounts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 507-519.
25. Murphy, R. (1994). Attributional complexity: Information search and integration during causal reasoning. Journal of Research in Personality, 28, 382-394.
26. Pope, J., & Meyer, R. (1999). An attributional analysis of jurors' judgments in a criminal case: A preliminary investigation. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 563-574.
27. Pratkanis, A. R., & Aronson, E. (1991). Age of propaganda: The everyday use and abuse of persuasion. New York: Freeman.
28. Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1975). Point of view and perceptions of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 439-445.
29. Wilson, T. D., & Brekke, N. (1994). Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 117-142.