Premium
Interacting influences on interrogative suggestibility
Author(s) -
Bain Stella A.,
Baxter James S.,
Fellowes Vivienne
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
legal and criminological psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.65
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 2044-8333
pISSN - 1355-3259
DOI - 10.1348/1355325041719419
Subject(s) - suggestibility , interview , interrogative , psychology , affect (linguistics) , self esteem , clinical psychology , developmental psychology , social psychology , communication , linguistics , philosophy , political science , law
Purpose. Research using the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS) has found interrogative suggestibility (IS) to vary as a function of the overall demeanour of the interviewer, warnings about the presence of misleading information, and the self‐esteem of the interviewee, as outlined by Gudjonsson and Clark (1986). The present study attempted to assess how these factors interact. Method. The study had a three‐factor between‐participants design: interviewer demeanour × instructional manipulation × self‐esteem. One hundred and twenty undergraduates took part in the study. Results. Participants reporting lower self‐esteem scored higher on the GSS ‘Shift’ measure than participants reporting higher levels of self‐esteem. Participants faced with a ‘Friendly’ interviewer scored lower on the GSS Yield 1 and Total Suggestibility measures than did those participants faced with a more ‘Abrupt’ interviewer. Participants warned about the presence of misleading information scored lower on Yield 1 and Total Suggestibility. A potentially key finding was that participants who received a warning demonstrated an increased number of Shifts in the Friendly condition compared with those who were not warned. In the Abrupt condition this pattern was reversed. Conclusion. The results supported studies showing that all three variables tested affect levels of IS but further suggested that optimal interviewer support for interviewees' discrepancy detection may be provided either by a relaxed interviewer manner or by warnings alone, but not by both.