Psychological Assumptions Underlying Credibility Assessments in Finnish Asylum Determinations

Abstract

Current best-practice guidelines for credibility assessments in asylum procedures have been criticized for their susceptibility to subjectivity and bias. The current study investigated assumptions underlying credibility assessments in Finnish first-instance asylum procedures and how these assumptions fit with widely accepted psychological science. Following previous research, we categorized assumptions in 56 real-life asylum cases from the Finnish Immigration Service. We found that asylum officials held assumptions about how truthful applicants present their claims, the plausibility of individuals’ behavior in their home countries, and applicants’ knowledge about asylum procedures. The assumptions were only partially in line with psychological science on memory, trauma, intercultural communication, and decision-making. To improve decision-making, training programs for asylum officials should include relevant findings from psychological science. To increase the transparency and combat bias, the written determination letters should also include explicit information about the decision-makers reasoning processes.

Eliciting information in official Finnish asylum interviews

“…Furthermore, only half of all key aspects of the persecution claims were elicited in the free recall phase, indicating that key facts are often disclosed later in the interviews. This may be due to a variety of contextual, inter‐, and intrapersonal factors (Bögner et al, 2010; Skrifvars et al, 2021). Factors that have been suggested to hinder disclosure include shame, a tendency to avoid unwanted emotional states, intrusive memories or flashbacks, and dissociative symptoms (Bögner et al, 2007; Herlihy & Turner, 2009).…”

“…Factors that have been suggested to hinder disclosure include shame, a tendency to avoid unwanted emotional states, intrusive memories or flashbacks, and dissociative symptoms (Bögner et al, 2007; Herlihy & Turner, 2009). The applicant may also be unsure of which aspects of a claim that are relevant, or remember more after recalling other memories, which is a natural human tendency (Herlihy & Turner, 2009; Skrifvars et al, 2021). The applicant may also have been inclined to come up with false new facts during the interview if they perceived their chances to receive asylum to be low.…”

“…Furthermore, only half of all key aspects of the persecution claims were elicited in the free recall phase, indicating that key facts are often disclosed later in the interviews. This may be due to a variety of contextual, inter-, and intrapersonal factors (Bögner et al, 2010;Skrifvars et al, 2021).…”

Urgent issues and prospects at the intersection of culture, memory, and witness interviews: Exploring the challenges for research and practice

“…Finally, the stereotypes we use to navigate the complex social and physical world are based on our limited and often culture‐specific experiences (Herlihy & Turner, 2009; van Veldhuizen, 2017). Decision‐makers tend to hold unfounded assumptions regarding human memory and behaviour, for instance, expecting an unreasonable level of detail, without accounting for the effect of culture on how detailed a description will be (Dowd et al, 2018; Skrifvars et al, 2021). Interviewers’ questions regarding an applicant's identity often reflect assumptions rooted in Western culture (LaViolette, 2017).…”

Asylum Claims based on Sexual Orientation: A Review of Psycho-legal Issues in Credibility Assessments

“…Further research is needed to corroborate the finding that asylum-seekers are more likely to be believed if they match Western stereotypes about sexual minorities. Previous studies on asylum decision-making have coded the assumptions officials make about asylum-seekers in their written decisions (Dowd et al, 2018;Herlihy & Turner, 2015;Skrifvars, Sui, et al, 2021).…”