Motivational bias in criminal investigators' judgments of witness reliability

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 561-591

  Ask, Karl ^a   Granhag, Pär Anders ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847737700     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00175.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Alison, L., Smith, M. D., & Morgan, K. (2003). Interpreting the accuracy of offender profiles. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 9, 185-195.
2. Ask, K., & Granhag, P. A. (2005). Motivational sources of confirmation bias in criminal investigations: The need for cognitive closure. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 2, 43-63.
3. Bodenhausen, G. V. (1990). Stereotypes as judgmental heuristics: Evidence of circadian variations in discrimination. Psychological Science, 1, 319- 322.
4. Brigham, J., & Wolfskiel, M. P. (1983). Opinions of attorneys and law enforcement personnel on the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. Law and Human Behavior, 7, 337-349.
5. Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.
6. De Dreu, C. K. W. (2003). Time pressure and closing of the mind in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 280- 295.
7. De Grada, E., Kruglanski, A. W., Mannetti, L., & Pierro, A. (1999). Motivated cognition and group interaction: Need for closure affects the contents and processes of collective negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 346-365.
8. Ditto, P. H., & Boardman, A. F. (1995). Perceived accuracy of favorable and unfavorable psychological feedback. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 137-157.
9. Ditto, P. H., & Lopez, D. F. (1992). Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 568-584.
10. Ditto, P. H., Munro, G. D., Apanovitch, A. M., Scepansky, J. A., & Lockhart, L. K. (2003). Spontaneous skepticism: The interplay of motivation and expectation in responses to favorable and unfavorable medical diagnoses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1120- 1132.
11. Ditto, P. H., Scepansky, J. A., Munro, G. D., Apanovitch, A. M., & Lockhart, L. K. (1998). Motivated sensitivity to preference-inconsistent information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 53-69.
12. Edland, A., & Svenson, O. (1993). Judgment and decision making under time pressure. In O. Svenson & J. Maule (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 27-40). New York: Plenum.
13. Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 5-24.
14. Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 41-80). New York: Academic Press.
15. Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Hartwig, M. (2005). Eyewitness testimony: Tracing the beliefs of Swedish legal professionals. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 709-727.
16. Greenwood, P. W., Chaiken, J. M., & Petersilia, J. (1977). The criminal investigation process. Lexington, MA: Heath.
17. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: International differences in workrelated values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
18. Hulland, J. S., & Kleinmuntz, D. N. (1994). Factors influencing the use of internal summary evaluations versus external information in choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 79-102.
19. Innes, M. (2002). The "process structures" of police homicide investigations. British Journal of Criminology, 42, 669-688.
20. Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 557-571.
21. Kaplan, M. F., Wanshula, T., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Time pressure and information integration in social judgment: The effect of need for structure. In O. Svenson & J. Maule (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 255-267). New York: Plenum.
22. Kaufmann, G., Drevland, G. C. B., Wessel, E., Overskeid, G., & Magnussen, S. (2003). The importance of being earnest: Displayed emotions and witness credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 21-34.
23. Klein, W. M., & Kunda, Z. (1992). Motivated person perception: Constructing justifications for desired beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 145-168.
24. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum.
25. Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Motivations for judging and knowing: Implications for causal attribution. In E. T. Higgins (Ed.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 333-368). New York: Guilford.
26. Kruglanski, A. W. (1996a). A motivated gatekeeper of our minds: Need-forclosure effects on interpersonal and group processes. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: The interpersonal context (Vol. 3, pp. 465-496). New York: Guilford.
27. Kruglanski, A. W. (1996b). Motivated social cognition: Principles of the interface. In E. T. Higgins (Ed.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 493-520). New York: Guilford.
28. Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448- 468.
29. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1991). Group members' reactions to opinion deviates and conformists at varying degrees of proximity to decision deadline and of environmental noise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 212-225.
30. Kruglanski, A. W., &Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing." Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
31. Kruglanski, A. W.,Webster, D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861-876.
32. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480-498.
33. Landström, S., Granhag, P. A. & Hartwig, M. (2005). Witnesses appearing live vs. on video: How presentation format affects observers' perception, assessment, and memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 913- 933.
34. Leippe, M. R., Manion, P. M., & Romanczyk, A. (1992). Eyewitness persuasion: How and how well do fact finders judge the accuracy of adults' and children's memory reports? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 181-197.
35. Lindholm, T. (2005). Group-based biases and validity in eyewitness credibility judgments: Examining effects of witness ethnicity and presentation modality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1474-1501.
36. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098- 2109.
37. Luus, C. A. E., Wells, G. L., & Turtle, J. W. (1995). Child eyewitnesses: Seeing is believing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 317-326.
38. Mayseless, O., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 162-183.
39. Mortimer, A., & Shepherd, E. (1999). Frames of mind: Schemata guiding cognition and conduct in the interviewing of suspected offenders. In A. Memon & R. Bull (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of interviewing (pp. 293-315). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
40. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.
41. Paglia, A., & Schuller, R. A. (1998). Jurors' use of hearsay evidence: The effects of type and timing of instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 5, 501-518.
42. Pakes, F. J. (2001). Spiders in the web: Public prosecutors at work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Leiden, The Netherlands.
43. Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. New York: Harcourt-Brace.
44. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258.
45. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521-533.
46. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
47. Pickel, K. L. (1998). The effects of motive information and crime unusualness on jurors' judgments in insanity cases. Law and Human Behavior, 5, 571-584.
48. Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1987). Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesistesting model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 297-340). New York: Academic Press.
49. Richter, L., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1998). Seizing on the latest: Motivationally driven recency effects in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 313-329.
50. Ross, D. F., Dunning, D., Toglia, M. P., & Ceci, S. J. (1989). Age stereotypes, communication modality, and mock jurors' perceptions of the child witness. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 39-56). New York: Springer.
51. Stevens, L. E., & Fiske, S. T. (2000). Motivated impressions of a powerholder: Accuracy under task dependency and misperception under evaluation dependency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 907- 922.
52. Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2003). Affecting the perception of verbal cues to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 35-49.
53. Tesser, A., & Conlee, M. C. (1975). Some effects of time and thought on attitude polarization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 262-270.
54. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
55. Wagenaar, W. A., van Koppen, P. J., & Crombag, H. F. M. (1993). Anchored narratives: The psychology of criminal evidence. New York: St. Martin's.
56. Webster, D. M. (1993). Motivated augmentation and reduction of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 261- 271.
57. Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062.
58. Webster, D. M., Richter, L., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1996). On leaping to conclusions when feeling tired: Mental fatigue effects on impressional primacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 181-195.
59. Webster Nelson, D., Klein, C. T. F., & Irvin, J. E. (2003). Motivational antecedents of empathy: Inhibiting effects of fatigue. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25, 37-50.
60. Winkel, F. W., & Koppelaar, L. (1992). Perceived credibility of the communicator: Studies of perceptual bias in police officers conducting rape interviews. In F. Lösel, D. Bender, & T. Bliesener (Eds.), Psychology and law: International perspectives (pp. 219-233). New York: Walter de Gruyter.