Juvenile offenders' Miranda rights comprehension and self-reported likelihood of offering false confessions

Assessment

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 359-369

  Goldstein, Naomi E Sevin ^a,d   Condie, Lois Oberlander ^b   Kalbeitzer, Rachel ^a   Osman, Douglas ^a   Geier, Jessica L ^c  

^a DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

^d DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Capacity to confess; False confessions; Juvenile offenders; Miranda rights

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGE; ARTICLE; CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; CIVIL RIGHTS; COMPREHENSION; CRIMINAL LAW; HUMAN; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; POLICE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; SELF DISCLOSURE; SUGGESTION; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT PSYCHOLOGY; AGE FACTORS; CIVIL RIGHTS; COERCION; COMPREHENSION; CRIMINAL LAW; HUMANS; JUVENILE DELINQUENCY; MALE; MASSACHUSETTS; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; POLICE; PSYCHOMETRICS; SELF DISCLOSURE; SUGGESTION;

EID: 2142748026     PISSN: 10731911     EISSN: 15523489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1073191103259535     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Abramovitch, R., Higgins-Biss, K., & Biss, S. (1993). Young persons' comprehension of waivers in criminal proceedings. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 35, 309-322.
2. Abramovitch, R., Peterson-Badali, M., & Rohan, M. (1995). Young people's understanding and assertion of their rights to silence and legal counsel. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 1-18.
3. Bove, A. W., Goldstein, N. E., Appleton, C., & Thomson, M. R. (2003, March). Gender differences in IQ among juvenile offenders. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Association of Forensic Mental Health Service, Miami, FL.
4. Condie, L., Goldstein, N. E., & Grisso, T. (2003). The Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments-II. Manuscript in preparation.
5. Coyote v. U.S., 380 F.2d 305 (1967).
6. Dickerson v. U.S., 530 U.S. 428 (2000).
7. Fare v. Michael C., 442 U.S. 707 (1979).
8. Ferguson, A. B., & Douglas, A. C. (1970). A study of juvenile waiver. San Diego Law Review, 7, 39-54.
9. Gallegos v. Colorado, 370 U.S. 49 (1962).
10. Goldstein, N. E., Mesiarik, C., Kalbeitzer, R., Thomson, C., Strachan, M., & Condie, L. (2003). Validity of the scoring criteria of the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments-II. Manuscript in preparation.
11. Grisso, T. (1981). Juveniles' waiver of rights: Legal and psychological competence. New York: Plenum.
12. Grisso, T. (1998). Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resources.
13. Grisso, T., Miller, M. O., & Sales, B. (1997). Competency to stand trial in juvenile court. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 10, 1-20.
14. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Singh, K. K. (1984). Interrogative suggestibility and delinquent boys: An empirical validation study. Personality & Individual Differences, 5, 425-430.
15. Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., & Buckley, J. P. (1986). Criminal interrogations and confessions (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.
16. In Re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
17. Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938).
18. Kassin, S. M., & Neumann, K. (1997). On the power of confession evidence: An experimental test of the fundamental difference hypothesis. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 469-484.
19. Kent v. U.S., 383 U.S. 541 (1966).
20. Lawrence, R. A. (1983). The role of legal counsel in juveniles' understanding of their rights. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 34, 49-58.
21. Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964).
22. Mesiarik, C., Goldstein, N. E., & Thomson, M. (2002, March). Validity of the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments-II scoring criteria and attorneys' perceptions of adequate Miranda comprehension. Symposium conducted at the biennial conference of the American Psychology-Law Society (Division 41 of the American Psychological Association), Austin, TX.
23. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
24. Oberlander, L. B., & Goldstein, N. E. (2001). A review and update on the practice of evaluating Miranda comprehension. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 453-471.
25. Oberlander, L. B., Goldstein, N. E., & Ho, C. N. (2001). Preadolescent adjudicative competence: Methodological considerations and recommendations for practice standards. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 545-563.
26. People v. Lara, 432 P.2d 202 (1967).
27. Psychological Corporation. (1992). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test Manual. San Antonio, TX: Author.
28. Psychological Corporation. (1999). Manual for the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. San Antonio, TX: Author.
29. Richardson, G., Gudjonsson, G. H., & Kelly, T. P. (1995). Interrogative suggestibility in an adolescent forensic population. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 211-216.
30. Shepherd, R. E., Jr., & Zaremba, B. A. (1995). When a disabled juvenile confesses to a crime: Should it be admissible? Criminal Justice, 9, 31-35.
31. Wall, S., & Furlong, M. (1985). Comprehension of Miranda rights by urban adolescents with law-related education. Psychological Reports, 56, 359-372.
32. Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.