Objectives We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available empirical literature assessing the influence of accusatorial and information-gathering methods of interrogation in eliciting true and false confessions. Methods We conducted two separate meta-analyses. The first meta-analysis focused on observational field studies that assessed the association between certain interrogation methods and elicitation of a confession statement. The second meta-analysis focused on experimental, laboratory-based studies in which ground truth was known (i.e., a confession is factually true or false). We located 5 field studies and 12 experimental studies eligible for the meta-analyses. We coded outcomes from both study types and report mean effect sizes with 95 % confidence intervals. A random effects model was used for analysis of effect sizes. Moderator analyses were conducted when appropriate.Results Field studies revealed that both information-gathering and accusatorial approaches were more likely to elicit a confession when compared with direct questioning methods. However, experimental studies revealed that the information-gathering approach preserved, and in some cases increased, the likelihood of true confessions, while simultaneously reducing the likelihood of false confessions. In contrast, the accusatorial approach increased both true and false confessions when compared with a direct questioning method. Conclusions The available data support the effectiveness of an information-gathering style of interviewing suspects. Caution is warranted, however, due to the small number of independent samples available for the analysis of both field and experimental studies. Additional research, including the use of quasi-experimental field studies, appears warranted.

The Campbell Collaboration (C2) was founded on the principle that systematic reviews on the effects of interventions will inform and help improve policy and services. C2 offers editorial and methodological support to review authors throughout the process of producing a systematic review. A number of C2's editors, librarians, methodologists and external peerreviewers contribute.The Campbell Collaboration ABSTRACT 6

No abstract

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies) conducted a decadal survey (anticipated report release date is 5 March 2019) to explore and identify promising research opportunities in the social and behavioral sciences (SBS) for applications to national security. The report also provides guidance for the development of a 10-year research agenda and identifies key opportunities for SBS research to strengthen intelligence analysis. Although often used as a research roadmap in the space sciences, the use of the decadal process to survey SBS research and to support research planning in the Intelligence Community (IC) is unprecedented. The decadal survey — the first conducted in this context -- highlights ways to promote interdisciplinary collaboration so that the insights and ideas of SBS researchers are fully integrated with the needs and objectives of the IC.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objective is to assess the effects of interrogation approach on confession outcomes for criminal (mock) suspects.