Opposing determinants of compliance and interrogative suggestibility

James Baxter, Stella Bain, Andrew Pringle, Holly Fowler, Tedis Tafili

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1 & 2) can illustrate why interviewees yield to pressure from interrogators. Variations of the GSS procedure can help isolate individual factors contributing to interrogative suggestibility. Induced malingering is one variation, instructing participants to ‘fake bad’ on the GSS. The present study used this method in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting findings of previous malingering studies. An innovation was to pre-test participants on the standard GSS 2 to allow them to be categorised as showing Low, Medium, or High interrogative suggestibility. These three groups then undertook the parallel GSS 1, under instruction to role-play a suspect attempting to appear abnormally suggestible. Results showed marked differences in the direction in which faking scores changed, from those at pre-testing, between the Low and the High groups. The High group showed decreased GSS scores and the Low group an increase: the Medium group scores followed the trend of the Low group scores. These results may explain previous inconsistencies between studies and may also show how differing expectancies and levels of interpersonal trust may affect forensic interviewees’ waiving of their right to silence.
LanguageEnglish
Pages918-924
Number of pages7
JournalPersonality and Individual Differences
Volume54
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2013

Fingerprint

Malingering
Compliance
Pressure
Direction compound

Keywords

  • expectancy
  • interrogative suggestibility
  • compliance
  • trust
  • opposing determinants
  • gudjonsson suggestibility scales

Cite this

Baxter, James ; Bain, Stella ; Pringle, Andrew ; Fowler, Holly ; Tafili, Tedis . / Opposing determinants of compliance and interrogative suggestibility. In: Personality and Individual Differences . 2013 ; Vol. 54, No. 8. pp. 918-924.
@article{0fe8943db22d474f9108819c82474a0e,
title = "Opposing determinants of compliance and interrogative suggestibility",
abstract = "The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1 & 2) can illustrate why interviewees yield to pressure from interrogators. Variations of the GSS procedure can help isolate individual factors contributing to interrogative suggestibility. Induced malingering is one variation, instructing participants to ‘fake bad’ on the GSS. The present study used this method in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting findings of previous malingering studies. An innovation was to pre-test participants on the standard GSS 2 to allow them to be categorised as showing Low, Medium, or High interrogative suggestibility. These three groups then undertook the parallel GSS 1, under instruction to role-play a suspect attempting to appear abnormally suggestible. Results showed marked differences in the direction in which faking scores changed, from those at pre-testing, between the Low and the High groups. The High group showed decreased GSS scores and the Low group an increase: the Medium group scores followed the trend of the Low group scores. These results may explain previous inconsistencies between studies and may also show how differing expectancies and levels of interpersonal trust may affect forensic interviewees’ waiving of their right to silence.",
keywords = "expectancy, interrogative suggestibility, compliance, trust, opposing determinants, gudjonsson suggestibility scales",
author = "James Baxter and Stella Bain and Andrew Pringle and Holly Fowler and Tedis Tafili",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1016/j.paid.2013.01.004",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "918--924",
journal = "Personality and Individual Differences",
issn = "0191-8869",
number = "8",

}

Opposing determinants of compliance and interrogative suggestibility. / Baxter, James; Bain, Stella; Pringle, Andrew; Fowler, Holly; Tafili, Tedis .

In: Personality and Individual Differences , Vol. 54, No. 8, 06.2013, p. 918-924.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Opposing determinants of compliance and interrogative suggestibility

AU - Baxter, James

AU - Bain, Stella

AU - Pringle, Andrew

AU - Fowler, Holly

AU - Tafili, Tedis

PY - 2013/6

Y1 - 2013/6

N2 - The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1 & 2) can illustrate why interviewees yield to pressure from interrogators. Variations of the GSS procedure can help isolate individual factors contributing to interrogative suggestibility. Induced malingering is one variation, instructing participants to ‘fake bad’ on the GSS. The present study used this method in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting findings of previous malingering studies. An innovation was to pre-test participants on the standard GSS 2 to allow them to be categorised as showing Low, Medium, or High interrogative suggestibility. These three groups then undertook the parallel GSS 1, under instruction to role-play a suspect attempting to appear abnormally suggestible. Results showed marked differences in the direction in which faking scores changed, from those at pre-testing, between the Low and the High groups. The High group showed decreased GSS scores and the Low group an increase: the Medium group scores followed the trend of the Low group scores. These results may explain previous inconsistencies between studies and may also show how differing expectancies and levels of interpersonal trust may affect forensic interviewees’ waiving of their right to silence.

AB - The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1 & 2) can illustrate why interviewees yield to pressure from interrogators. Variations of the GSS procedure can help isolate individual factors contributing to interrogative suggestibility. Induced malingering is one variation, instructing participants to ‘fake bad’ on the GSS. The present study used this method in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting findings of previous malingering studies. An innovation was to pre-test participants on the standard GSS 2 to allow them to be categorised as showing Low, Medium, or High interrogative suggestibility. These three groups then undertook the parallel GSS 1, under instruction to role-play a suspect attempting to appear abnormally suggestible. Results showed marked differences in the direction in which faking scores changed, from those at pre-testing, between the Low and the High groups. The High group showed decreased GSS scores and the Low group an increase: the Medium group scores followed the trend of the Low group scores. These results may explain previous inconsistencies between studies and may also show how differing expectancies and levels of interpersonal trust may affect forensic interviewees’ waiving of their right to silence.

KW - expectancy

KW - interrogative suggestibility

KW - compliance

KW - trust

KW - opposing determinants

KW - gudjonsson suggestibility scales

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875106016&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.paid.2013.01.004

DO - 10.1016/j.paid.2013.01.004

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 918

EP - 924

JO - Personality and Individual Differences

T2 - Personality and Individual Differences

JF - Personality and Individual Differences

SN - 0191-8869

IS - 8

ER -