By Candice Brooks
A research study by Psychology Professor Daniel Lassiter demonstrates that mere camera perspective of videotaped confessions can alter verdicts in trials. Lassiter's research is attracting nationwide attention, from The Wall Street Journal to the Journal of Applied Psychology.
|
| Dan Lassiter |
Police are trained to use techniques to maximize the implications of evidence against a suspect or minimize the consequences of a confession during interrogations. "Once they move to an interrogation, instead of just interviewing to gathering information, they already think you are guilty. Any protests of innocence will fall on deaf ears," Lassiter said. Some confessions resulting from these tactics are admitted in court and carry much weight.After 15 studies and approximately 16 years of research, Lassiter said people are more likely to think a confession was voluntary and not coerced when the camera is exclusively focused on the suspect, as in most videotaped confessions today. He said, "The focus on the suspect minimizes the influence of the interrogator."
Mock jurors from across Ohio judged if a confession was voluntary in simulated trails with a retired judge, two lawyers, and actors from the School of Theater all playing realistic roles. When the camera was focused equally on the suspect and interrogator, the conviction rate was 15 percent. However, when the camera was focused on only the suspect, the conviction rate was 31 percent. This disparity is what Lassiter calls camera perspective bias.
Lassiter's research is based on a concept called illusory causation by Taylor and Fisk in 1975. The experiment found that it is the tendency of an observer to believe the person they are facing or who is most visible influences an action the most. Research based on real-life interactions and laboratory experiments "show that when people witness an interaction, they tend to attribute causality to events or individuals that are more noticeable."
Lassiter said the research findings should be a real concern of the legal community. He said, "In two-thirds of wrongful homicide convictions in which DNA was found, false confession was the basis of the conviction."
He told Sharon Begley of The Wall Street Journal, "Young or middle-age, male or female, student or not, watching only brief confessions or entire trials, all volunteers reacted the same way. 'They judged videotaped confessions recorded with the camera focused on the suspect as more voluntary than videos focused equally on the suspect and interrogator, even when the content was identical.' The results were the same for confessions of manslaughter, rape, burglary, drug trafficking and shoplifting. They were the same even when volunteers were told to note the prejudicial effect of camera angle."
The study had influence on the national policy in New Zealand. Now during interrogations the video camera is equally focused on the suspect and the interrogator. Lassiter said, "My hope is that a similar policy will be adopted in the United States. Why take the risk of letting this bias come to play in court?"
Candace Brooks is a student writer with University Communications and Marketing.
