ABSTRACT
Indeed, one can distinguish three types of false confession: voluntary (in which a subject confesses in the absence of external pressure), coerced–compliant (in which a suspect confesses only to escape an aversive interrogation, secure a promised benefit, or avoid a threatened harm), and coerced–internalized (in which a suspect actually comes to believe that he or she is guilty of the crime). This last type of false confession seems most unlikely, but a number of recent cases have come to light in which the police had seized a suspect who was vulnerable (by virtue of his or her youth, intelligence) and used false evidence to convince the beleaguered suspect that he or she was guilty. The study provides strong initial support for the provocative notion that the presentation of false incriminating evidence—an interrogation ploy that is common among the police and sanctioned by many courts— can induce people to internalize blame for outcomes they did not produce.
