For the interviewing process, due to psychological phenomenon such as behavioral confirmation bias or self-fulfilling prophecy, it can be quite evitable that investigators can be inaccurate about their assumptions towards an individual. Investigators’ inaccuracy of guilt and deception can be compared to eyewitness testimonies, in which the witness telling of a crime would come up inaccurate as well. I was genuinely confused about the waiving of the Miranda rights; one would think that an innocent individual would exercise their right to silence and to counsel. As an investigator, I might be a bit critical about the accuracy of the reasons and request further experimentation to learn of the thinking behind the suspects’ decisions. Nonetheless, the reasons behind the waiving including trying to seen as innocent or not suspicious is understandable, especially since one can be under pressure during the whole process. Lastly, the study of presumptive guilt and the three processes (isolation, confrontation, and minimization) are strong points to show how an innocent person can be influenced to falsely confess. The guilt-presumptive process involving an authoritative person’s goal to get a confession out of an accused will not only inflate the investigator’s confidence, but can increase likelihood for more judgment errors of deception and truth. The three tactics used during the interrogation process in my opinion are not effective. Prolonged isolation can impair a suspect’s decision making skills, which can increase their anxiety during confrontation and will only see confessing as an escape. All in all, I agree with Kassin and the points he made, including the use of videotaping to decrease these issues in the interrogation
For the interviewing process, due to psychological phenomenon such as behavioral confirmation bias or self-fulfilling prophecy, it can be quite evitable that investigators can be inaccurate about their assumptions towards an individual. Investigators’ inaccuracy of guilt and deception can be compared to eyewitness testimonies, in which the witness telling of a crime would come up inaccurate as well. I was genuinely confused about the waiving of the Miranda rights; one would think that an innocent individual would exercise their right to silence and to counsel. As an investigator, I might be a bit critical about the accuracy of the reasons and request further experimentation to learn of the thinking behind the suspects’ decisions. Nonetheless, the reasons behind the waiving including trying to seen as innocent or not suspicious is understandable, especially since one can be under pressure during the whole process. Lastly, the study of presumptive guilt and the three processes (isolation, confrontation, and minimization) are strong points to show how an innocent person can be influenced to falsely confess. The guilt-presumptive process involving an authoritative person’s goal to get a confession out of an accused will not only inflate the investigator’s confidence, but can increase likelihood for more judgment errors of deception and truth. The three tactics used during the interrogation process in my opinion are not effective. Prolonged isolation can impair a suspect’s decision making skills, which can increase their anxiety during confrontation and will only see confessing as an escape. All in all, I agree with Kassin and the points he made, including the use of videotaping to decrease these issues in the interrogation