The reading complexity and listening comprehension of Canadian police cautions were measured. In Study 1, the complexity of 44 unique Canadian police cautions was assessed using five readability measures (Flesch-Kincaid reading level, sentence complexity, use of difficult words, use of infrequent words, and number of words). Results showed that 7 (37%) of the rightto-silence cautions (n = 19) and none of the right-to-legal-counsel cautions (n = 25) reached acceptable cutoff levels for all five measures. In Study 2, university students (N = 121) were presented with one of three cautions verbally and were asked to explain its meaning. Despite variations in complexity across the three cautions, participants understood approximately one third of the information contained in the cautions. The extent to which the needs of Canadian suspects and police organizations are being met and the validity of reading complexity as a predictor of listening comprehension are discussed.

Nous avons mesuré le taux de compréhension de deux mises en garde données par les policiers auprès d'un échantillon de contrevenants adultes canadiens et avons prédit leur compréhension à l'aide de trois moyens de mesure d'habiletés intellectuelles (c.-à-d. la mémoire opérationnelle, le vocabulaire et la compréhension auditive). Les participants (N = 60) ont dû écouter à une mise en garde sur le droit au silence et une autre sur le droit à un avocat, puis les interpréter. Les résultats démontrent que les contrevenants ont compris 30 % de leurs droits et que les mesures d'habilités intellectuelles étaient de mauvais prédicteurs de compréhension. Les impacts de ces résultats sur notre compréhension des facteurs liés à la compréhension des mises en garde et à la gestion de la justice sont examinés.Mots clés : mises en garde par la police, Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, habileté intellectuelle, justice, interrogatoires, contrevenantsWe measured the level of comprehension of two police cautions in a sample of adult Canadian offenders and predicted comprehension with three measures of cognitive ability (i.e., working memory, vocabulary knowledge, and listening comprehension). Participants (N = 60) were asked to listen to both a right to silence and right to legal counsel caution and then interpret them. Results showed that the offenders understood 30% of their rights, and the measures of cognitive abilities were weak predictors of comprehension. The implications of these findings for understanding the factors related to caution comprehension and the administration of justice are discussed.

No abstract