• Login
    View Item 
    •   eScholar Home
    • Graduate & Postdoctoral Studies
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   eScholar Home
    • Graduate & Postdoctoral Studies
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Toward assessing and improving the protective efficacy of Canadians’ interrogation rights: misinformation and caution comprehension

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Connors_Christina_J.pdf (966.8Kb)
    Date
    2022-08-01
    Author
    Connors, Christina J.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The right to silence and right to counsel serve to protect detainees facing the power imbalance of police interrogation. Unfortunately, research indicates people are misinformed about their rights and struggle to comprehend the police cautions which explain them. This reduces the protective efficacy of rights in practice. Three inter-related studies sought to address these issues within a Canadian-specific context. First, Canadians’ (N = 212) interrogation rights knowledge was assessed through open-ended, vignette, and true/false measures. Many Canadians (72-95%) were misinformed about important aspects, and limitations, of their interrogation rights. Next, to improve knowledge and increase caution comprehension, a widely used Canadian police caution (RCMP) was modified to create a 1) “Simplified” caution with reworked wording, structure, and added explanations, and 2) an “Informative” (simplified) caution, with added content about rights limitations. Cautions were assessed for readability and complexity, then tested in a 4-condition low-stakes online experiment with Canadians (N = 200) using measures from Study 1. Despite most Canadians self-reporting caution comprehension (94-98%), and Informational condition participants demonstrating higher average scores, comprehension was low overall and group differences were not significant. However, average correct knowledge scores and key rights limitation scores were significantly higher for the Informative caution participants compared to those in the RCMP or no caution conditions. Finally, to increase test validity of the modified cautions, Ontario Tech undergraduates (N = 90) participated in a 3-condition higher-stakes mock-interrogation, guised as a “convincing alibi” study. Students prepared an alibi, heard 1 of 3 cautions, provided their alibi under mild duress, and completed Study 2 measures. Results mirrored Study 2: all students self-reported caution understanding, but comprehension scores were low overall. Students hearing the Informative caution demonstrated higher average correct rights knowledge, followed by the Simplified, then RCMP caution, however, differences were only significant for the right to counsel. This research indicates that - although Canadians are misinformed about their interrogation rights - knowledge of rights can be improved by altering the wording and structure of, and adding critical information to, Canadian police cautions. Through improving knowledge and comprehension, we can enhance the protective efficacy of interrogation rights for Canadians.
    URI
    https://hdl.handle.net/10155/1527
    Collections
    • Doctoral Dissertations [14]
    • Electronic Theses and Dissertations [1428]

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of eScholarCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV