MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323263040 · doi:10.1177/1098611110392721

Changing Their Mind About Confessing to Police: The Role of Contextual Factors in Crime Confession

2011· article· en· W2323263040 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolice Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfession (law)InterrogationPsychologyCriminologyMultinomial logistic regressionSocial psychologyLawPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate the offender’s decision making in crime confession during police interrogation. On the basis of a sample of 211 incarcerated offenders, the study showed that 21% of offenders changed their mind about confessing or not their crime following police interrogation. Logit regression indicated that contextual factors were associated with the offender’s final decision to confess after controlling for the offender’s initial decision. Multinomial regression further showed that offenders with a lengthy criminal record, advised by a lawyer, and facing drug-related charges characterized by weak police evidence were less likely to confess to the police, even when they initially planned to do so. Findings are discussed in light of the literature on crime confession.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it