Miranda comprehension in adults with mental retardation and the effects of feedback style on suggestibility

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 359-369

  O'Connell, Michael J ^a   Garmoe, William ^a   Goldstein, Naomi E Sevin ^b  

^a NATIONAL REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Mental retardation; Miranda comprehension; Suggestibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COMPREHENSION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RIGHTS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL DEFICIENCY; REVIEW; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CRIMINAL LAW; DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS; SUGGESTION;

ADULT; COGNITION; CRIMINAL LAW; DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS; FEEDBACK; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL RETARDATION; SUGGESTION;

EID: 24044480389     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-005-2965-y     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2. Cassell, P. G. (1996). Miranda's social costs: An empirical reassessment. Northwestern University Law Review, 90, 387-499.
3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
4. Condie, L. O., Goldstein, N. E. S., & Grisso, T. (2005). The Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments - II. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press. Manuscript in preparation.
5. Coyote v. U.S., 380 F.2d 305 (1967).
6. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
7. Everington, C., & Fulero, S. (1999). Competence to confess: Measuring understanding and suggestibility of defendants with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 37(3), 212-220.
8. Fare v. Michael C., 442 U.S. 707 (1979).
9. Fulero, S., & Everington, C. (1995). Assessing competency to waive Miranda rights in defendants with mental retardation. Law and Human Behavior, 19(5), 533-543.
10. Goldstein, N. E. S., Condie, L. O., & Kalbeitzer, R. (in press). Assessing juvenile's competency to waive Miranda rights. In T. Grisso, G. Vincent, & D. Seagrave (Eds.), Handbook for mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice. New York: Guilford Publications.
11. Goldstein, N. E., Condie, L. O., Kalbeitzer, R., Mesiarik, C., & Geier, J. (2005). Psychometric properties of the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments - II. Manuscript in prepration.
12. Goldstein, N. E., Condie, L. O., Kalbeitzer, R., Osman, D., & Geier, J. (2003). Juvenile offenders' Miranda rights comprehension and self-reported likelihood of offering false confessions. Assessment, 10, 359-369.
13. Grisso, T. (1981). Juveniles' waiver of rights: Legal and psychological competence. New York: Plenum Press.
14. Grisso, T. (1998). Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda Rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press, Inc.
15. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1988a). Interrogative suggestibility: Its relationship with assertiveness, social-evaluative anxiety, state anxiety and method of coping. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 159-166.
16. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1988b). The relationship of intelligence and memory to interrogative suggestibility: The importance of range effects. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 185-187.
17. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1997). The Gudjonsson suggestibility scales manual. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
18. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions. West Sussex. England: Wiley.
19. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Clark, N. K. (1986). Suggestibility in police interrogations: A social psychological model. Social Behavior, 1, 83-104.
20. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Petursson, H. (1991). Custodial interrogation: Why do suspects confess and how does it relate to their crime, attitude and personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 295-306.
21. Henry, L., & Gudjonsson, G. (1999). Eyewitness memory and suggestibility in children with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 104(6), 491-508.
22. Inbau, F. E., Ried, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2001). Criminal interrogation and confessions (4th ed.). Gathersberg, MD: Aspen.
23. Kalbeitzer, R., Strachan, M., Goldstein, N. E. S., Mesiarik, C., McCoy, K., & Condie, L. O. (2004. March). The psychometric properties of the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments -II. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychology - Law Society, Scottsdale, AZ.
24. Kassin, S. (1997). The psychology of confession evidence. American Psychologist, 52(3), 221-233.
25. Kassin, S., & Kiechel, K. (1996). The social psychology of false confessions: Compliance, internalization and confabulation. Psychological Science, 7, 125-128.
26. Kassin, S., & McNall, K. (1991). Police interrogations and confessions. Law and Human Behavior, 15(3), 233-251.
27. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
28. Praiss, D. (1989). Constitutional protection of confessions made by mentally retarded defendants. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 14(4), 431-465.
29. Veneziano, L., & Veneziano, C. (1996). Disabled inmates. In M. McShane & F. Williams (Eds.), Encyclopedia of American prisons (pp. 157-161). New York: Garland.
30. West v. U.S., 399 F2d 467 (1968).