Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-07-2008 | Empirical Research

Examining Adolescents’ and their Parents’ Conceptual and Practical Knowledge of Police Interrogation: A Family Dyad Approach

Auteurs: Jennifer L. Woolard, Hayley M. D. Cleary, Samantha A. S. Harvell, Rusan Chen

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence | Uitgave 6/2008

Abstract

This study examines whether parents have the prerequisite knowledge about police interrogation that would allow them to compensate for youths’ knowledge deficits, protect their interests, and buffer against their vulnerability to coercion. A racially diverse urban/suburban convenience sample of 77 11- to 13-year-olds, 46 14- to 15-year-olds, and 47 16- to 17-year-olds and their parents completed a semi-structured interview on knowledge of legal rights and police practices. Results show that parents know more than younger adolescents about components of the Miranda warning and its behavioral implications but do not necessarily know more about police strategy or the parameters of parental protection. Age and socioeconomic status were associated with youths’ risk for poor knowledge. Among parents, IQ, race, and the child’s age predicted risk classification. Parent IQ, socioeconomic status, and youths’ justice experience, race, and age predicted whether families were classified as at risk for poor knowledge. The results question legal assumptions about parents’ capacity for protecting youths’ interests without intervention.

vorige artikel Procedural Justice in Family Conflict Resolution and Deviant Peer Group Involvement Among Adolescents: The Mediating Influence of Peer Conflict

volgende artikel A Model of Sexual Abuse’s Effects on Suicidal Behavior and Delinquency: The Role of Emotions as Mediating Factors

There are important distinctions between custodial interrogations (suspect is under arrest) and non-custodial interrogations (suspect is not under arrest). Law enforcement training (e.g., Reid & Associates, www.reid.com) also distinguishes interrogation (an accusatory confrontation to learn the truth when there is a reasonable certainty about guilt) from an interview (a non-accusatory interview to gather information). An interview can be formal (in a controlled setting) or informal (in a non-controlled setting). For brevity we generally use “interrogation” to refer to both interrogations and interviews, when necessary clarifying specific parameters of custodial interrogation (e.g., Miranda only applies for custodial interrogation).

Abramovitch, R., Higgins-Biss, K. L., & Biss, S. R. (1993). Young persons’ comprehension of waivers in criminal proceedings. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 35, 309–322.

Abramovitch, R., Peterson-Badali, M., & Rohan, M. (1995). Young people’s understanding and assertion of their rights to silence and legal counsel. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 1–18.

Bergman, P., & Berman-Barrett, S. (2004). The criminal law handbook: Know your rights, know the system (6th ed.). Berkeley, CA: Nolo Press.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Drizin, S. A., & Colgan, B. A. (2004). Tales from the juvenile confession front: A guide to how standard police interrogation tactics can produce coerced and false confessions from juvenile suspects. In G. D. Lassiter (Ed.), Interrogations, confessions, and entrapment (pp. 127–162). New York: Kluwer Academic.

Fagan, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2005). Legal socialization of children and adolescents. Social Justice Research, 18(3), 217–241.CrossRef

Farber, H. B. (2004). The role of the parent/guardian in juvenile custodial interrogations: Friend or foe? American Criminal Law Review, 41, 1277–1312.

Fare v. Michael C., 442 U.S. 707 (1979).

Feld, B. C. (2000). Juveniles’ waiver of legal rights: Confessions, Miranda, and the right to counsel. In T. Grisso & R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice (pp. 105–138). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Feld, B. C. (2006). Juveniles’ competence to exercise Miranda rights: An empirical study of policy and practice. Minnesota Law Review, 91, 26–100.

Ferguson, B., & Douglas, A. C. (1970). A study of juvenile waiver. San Diego Law Review, 7, 39–54.

Gallegos v. Colorado, 370 U.S. 49 (1962).

Goldstein, N. E., Condie, L. O., Kalbeitzer, R., Osman, D., & Geier, J. L. (2003). Juvenile offenders’ Miranda rights comprehension and self-reported likelihood of offering false confessions. Assessment, 10, 359–369.PubMedCrossRef

Grisso, T. (1980). Juveniles’ capacities to waive Miranda rights: An empirical analysis. California Law Review, 68, 1134–1166.CrossRef

Grisso, T. (1981). Juveniles’ waiver of rights: legal and psychological competence. New York: Plenum.

Grisso, T. (1998). Instruments for assessing understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press/Professional Resource Exchange.

Grisso, T., & Pomicter, C. (1977). Interrogation of juveniles: An empirical study of procedures, safeguards and rights waiver. Law and Human Behavior, 1, 321–342.CrossRef

Grisso, T., Steinberg, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., Scott, E. S., Graham, S., et al. (2003). Juveniles’ competence to stand trial: a comparison of adolescents’ and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 333–363.PubMedCrossRef

Haagenars J. A., & McCutcheon A. L. (Eds.). (2002). Applied latent class analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Haley v. Ohio, 332 U.S. 596 (1948).

Hawkins D. F., & Kempf-Leonard K. (Eds.). (2005). Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in American juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Huang, D. T. (2001). “Less unequal footing”: State courts’ per se rules for juvenile waivers during interrogations and the case for their implementation. Cornell Law Review, 86, 437–482.

Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., Spicer, P. (2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747–770.PubMedCrossRef

In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).

Jaccard, J. (2001). Interaction effects in logistic regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.

Krzewinski, L. M. (2002). But I didn’t do it: Protecting the rights of juveniles during interrogation. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 22, 355–387.

Meyer, J., Reppucci, N. D., & Owen, J. (2006, March). Criminal interrogation with young suspects: perspectives and practices of law enforcement. In J.L. Woolard (chair), Police interrogation of juvenile suspects. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Psychology-Law Society, St. Petersburg, Florida.

Milne, R., & Bull, R. (1999). Investigative interviewing: psychology and practice. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

Osher, T., & Hunt, P. (2002, December). Involving families of youth who are in contact with the juvenile justice system. Research and program brief. Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice.

Pearse, J., Gudjonsson, G. H., Clare, I. C. H., & Rutter, S. (1998). Police interviewing and psychological vulnerabilities: Predicting the likelihood of a confession. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 8, 1–21.CrossRef

Peterson-Badali, M., & Abramovitch, R. (1992). Children’s knowledge of the legal system: Are they competent to instruct legal counsel? Canadian Journal of Criminology, 34, 139–160.

Peterson-Badali, M., Abramovitch, R., Koegl, C. J., & Ruck, M. D. (1999). Young people’s experience of the Canadian youth justice system: interacting with police and legal counsel. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17(4), 455–465.PubMedCrossRef

Psychological Corporation (1999). Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

Redlich, A. D., & Goodman, G. S. (2003). Taking responsibility for an act not committed: The influence of age and suggestibility. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 141–156.PubMedCrossRef

Redlich, A. D., Silverman, M., & Steiner, H. (2003). Pre-adjudicative and adjudicative competence in juveniles and young adults. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 393–410.PubMedCrossRef

Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Szymanski, L. (2002a). Juvenile waiver of Miranda rights; Interested adult test. NCJJ Snapshot, 7(2); Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

Szymanski, L. (2002b). Juvenile waiver of Miranda rights: Totality of the circumstances test. NCJJ Snapshot, 7(1); Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

Szymanski, L. (2004). Juvenile waiver of Miranda rights; Per se age test (2004 Update). NCJJ Snapshot, 9(6); Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

Viljoen, J. L., & Roesch, R. (2005). Competence to waive interrogation rights and adjudicative competence in adolescent defendants: Cognitive development, attorney contact, and psychological symptoms. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 723–742.PubMedCrossRef

Viljoen, J. L., Zapf, P. A., & Roesch, R. (2007). Adjudicative competence and comprehension of Miranda rights in adolescent defendants: A comparison of legal standards. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 1–19.PubMedCrossRef

Woolard, J. L. (2002). Capacity, competence, and the juvenile defendant. In B. Bottoms, M. Kovera, & B. McAuliff (Eds.), Children, social science, and the law (pp. 270–298). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Woolard, J. L., Harvell, S., & Daglis, H. (2006, March). Parents as developmental protection for adolescents in interrogation: Perspectives from parents, youth, and law enforcement. In J. Woolard (Chair), Police interrogation of adolescent suspects: Developmental assumptions, practical realities, and policy implications . Symposium conducted at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Francisco, CA.

Woolard, J. L., Harvell, S., & Graham, S. (in press). Age and racial/ethnic differences in perceived unfairness of the justice system. Behavioral Sciences and the Law.

Woolard, J. L., & Reppucci, N. D. (1998). Researching juveniles’ capacities as defendants. In T. Grisso & R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: a developmental perspective on juvenile justice (pp. 173–191). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652 (2004).

Titel: Examining Adolescents’ and their Parents’ Conceptual and Practical Knowledge of Police Interrogation: A Family Dyad Approach
Auteurs: Jennifer L. Woolard
Hayley M. D. Cleary
Samantha A. S. Harvell
Rusan Chen
Publicatiedatum: 01-07-2008
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence / Uitgave 6/2008
Print ISSN: 0047-2891
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-6601
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9288-5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2008

Procedural Justice in Family Conflict Resolution and Deviant Peer Group Involvement Among Adolescents: The Mediating Influence of Peer Conflict

Familial Correlates of Overt and Relational Aggression between Young Adolescent Siblings

A Model of Sexual Abuse’s Effects on Suicidal Behavior and Delinquency: The Role of Emotions as Mediating Factors

Social Motives Underlying Antisocial Behavior Across Middle School Grades

Letter to the Editor

Relational Aggression at School: Associations with School Safety and Social Climate