Literature Review for the Intervention Proposal
In Week One, you created an annotated bibliography. It is now time to take that research and begin working on your Intervention Proposal. One of the main components of an intervention proposal is the literature review. This week you will be drafting a portion of the literature review that you will include in your Week Six Intervention Proposal. For this week, choose three to four articles that include in a mini literature review that you will build on during Week Six to complete your Intervention Proposal. These articles should all be recent (published within the past 10 years). You should also cite other material (e.g., seminal works about the theories) as appropriate.
In your literature review: •State your thesis statement that is your professional opinion. •Briefly explain the organization of the paper. For example, if there is a major controversy in this literature, briefly describe the controversy and state that you will present research supporting first one side, and then the other. Or, if three methodologies have been used to address the question, briefly describe them and then state that you will compare the results obtained by the three methods. •Begin by broadly discussing the literature. Then, narrow your review to the studies that are most related to your research question. Your literature review should resemble a funnel – wide (broad) at the top and narrow (focused) at the bottom. ◦Ensure that at least one article (but no more than two) supports the opposing side to your thesis. ◦Describe studies in enough detail that the reader has a general sense of the study’s hypothesis, methods, and findings. ◦Evaluate the studies. Do not provide article summaries; rather, provide descriptive and scholarly evaluations of the research.
•Discuss implications of studies (i.e., your judgment of what the studies show and where to go from here). It is common (and often better) to combine the description and evaluation sections. If you do combine them, do not forget to evaluate them. •State your conclusion that reaffirms your professional opinion.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Police Interrogations & False Confessions
Kassin, S., Drizin, S. , Grisso, T., Gudjohnson, G., Leo, R. & Redlich, A. (2009). Police-Induced Confessions: Risk Factors and Recommendations. Law and Human Behaviors, 1-36.
The principal aims of this study are to identify risk factors associated with police arrest and false confessions and the investigate methods whether the severity of the impaired by psychological disorder condition/symptoms may increase the risk. It is important to identify risk factors associated with police interrogation and false confessions so that appropriate safeguards may be applied. Age is a significant predictor of outcome. A review of the literature revealed that juveniles and adults impaired by intellectual disability or a psychological disorder might be more prone to vulnerable of giving a false confession during interrogation than adults that is of sound mind and body. The extent of offending behavior (OB) is also predictive of false confessions both among juveniles in the community.
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons According to the research that Gudjonsson, G.H completed in 2003 “The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions.” Summarizes the investigation process and why it can be problematic: Interrogation is by deﬁnition a guilt-presumptive process, a theory-driven social interaction led by an authority ﬁgure who already believes that he or she is interrogating the perpetrator and for whom confession measures a just outcome. In the case of innocent suspects, one would hope that investigators would periodically re-evaluate their beliefs. Over the years, however, a good deal of research has shown that once people form an impression, they unwittingly seek, interpret, and create behavioral data that verify it. This last phenomenon – often referred to as the behavioral confirmation bias – has been observed not only in the laboratory but classrooms, the military, the workplace, and other settings” (Gudjonsson 2003).
Lassiter, G. D. (2010). Videotaped interrogations and confessions: What’s obvious in hindsight may not be in foresight. Law and Human Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10979-009-9202-z Nevertheless, the DNA exonerations provide a window into the causes of erroneous prosecution and wrongful conviction. A disturbing number of these cases involved false confessions given by innocent defendants during a psychologically coercive police interrogation false confessions raise important questions for social scientists, mental health professionals, policy-makers, and the public. They are consistently one of the leading, yet most misunderstood, causes of error in the American legal system and thus remain one of the most prejudicial sources of false evidence that lead to wrongful convictions. In this article, I will review and analyze the empirical research on the causes and correlates of false confessions, the psychological logic and various types of false confession, and the consequences of introducing false-confession evidence at trials. About long term effects as well as short-term effects as well.
Sullivan, Y. P., Vail, A. W., & Anderson, H. W. (2008). The case for recording police interrogation. Litigation, 34(3), 1–8. So many of the nation’s more wrongful convictions have been overturned by DNA evidence involved some form of a false confession. It’s virtually impossible to fathom why someone would confess to a crime he or she did not commit. Researchers who study this catastrophic event and determined that the following factors contribute to or cause false confessions more than likely: Real or perceived intimidation of the suspect by law enforcement. Use of force by law enforcement during the interrogation, or perceived threat of strength. Compromised reasoning ability of the suspect, due to exhaustion, stress, hunger, substance use, and, in some cases, mental limitations, or limited education. Devious interrogation techniques, such as untrue statements about the presence of incriminating evidence. Fear, on the part of the suspect, that failure to confess will yield a harsher punishment, in light of these potential false threats. Recording interrogations was a way to look back, and see a particular condition of suspects, during their time of questioning, by law enforcement. Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Psychological vulnerabilities during police interviews. Why are they important Journal: Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2010, Volume 15, Number 2, Page 161DOI: 10.1348/135532510X500064. In recent years much has been learned about the roles and importance of psychological vulnerabilities in the sense of unreliability of information obtained during police interrogations. This article reviews the current state of knowledge and explains why vulnerabilities are important. Psychological vulnerabilities are best construed as potential ‘risk factors’ rather than definitive markers of unreliability. They are important, because they may place witnesses, victims, and suspects at a disadvantage in terms of coping with the demand characteristics of the interrogations (and subsequent Court process) and being able to provide the police with salient, detailed, accurate, and coherent answers to questions. Early identification of relevant and pertinent vulnerabilities in a interrogations process helps to ensure fairness and justice. Currently, the identification of vulnerabilities is poor, and even when identified, they are not always acted upon.
Richard A. Leo, False Confessions: Causes, Consequences, and Implications: Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online September 2009, 37 (3) 332-343; Police-induced false confessions are among the leading causes of wrongful convictions. There are two doctrines in the criminal law designed to keep police conversion confessions from reaching the jury. The first is the Miranda warnings intended to establish procedural safeguards to protect a suspect from unknowingly incriminating himself, however someone from a poor background may not understand these rights, or some law enforcement officer may not read these rights to a suspects and unknowingly to an uneducated suspect, they would know that their rights are being violated. The second is the voluntariness requirement that prevents coerced confessions from reaching the jury. However, these rules govern the admissibility of a confession into evidence only; they cannot be relied upon to determine false from true confessions. To combat false confessions and wrongful convictions, innocent defendants must turn to social scientists and expert witnesses to present evidence on the dynamics of false confessions. Since the DNA exonerations by the Innocence Project have conclusively proven the innocence of some confessed offenders, social scientists have been able to examine false confessions in more detail.