Anna S. Knes, Evan M. Lowder, Mindy L. Thai, Sydney M. Reuter, Autumn R. Kent
{"title":"Multi-study examination of criminal-legal professionals' use of risk assessments in pretrial decision-making","authors":"Anna S. Knes, Evan M. Lowder, Mindy L. Thai, Sydney M. Reuter, Autumn R. Kent","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12305","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12305","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Risk assessments represent a contemporary solution to reform bail practices. Current research suggests such tools can promote nonfinancial release. However, fewer studies have examined why judges may not regularly adhere to pretrial risk assessments and how other pretrial practices may affect risk assessment-guided decision-making.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Aim</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examined how long-standing and newer pretrial practices—the presence of counsel at first appearance, continued reliance on traditional bail setting practices and the use of structured guidelines—informs pretrial release decision.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey of 146 US criminal-legal professionals representing defence attorneys (37.2%), pretrial services officers (26.4%), prosecutors (14.0%), judges (8.3%), and other roles (14.0%). The survey involved three randomized vignette scenarios and questions on respondents' background and perceptions of risk assessments. In each vignette, participants rated their probability of a release on recognizance, detention, bail and supervision decision. Analyses incorporated a combination of <i>t</i>-tests, ANOVAs and multiple regressions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Findings indicated the absence of counsel at first appearance and presence of a traditional bail system led to a lower likelihood of releasing on recognizance, while the provision of structured guidelines did not alter participants' likelihood of releasing on recognizance, assigning bail or assigning significantly higher bail amounts. Participants' race, political affiliation and confidence in daily decision-making were associated with certain release decisions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our findings suggest other pretrial practices limit the consideration of risk assessment information in decision-making. To promote greater adherence to risk assessment tools, we recommend strategies to curtail discretionary use of bail when pretrial risk assessments are present.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":"268-297"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12305","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144833034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Allison D. Redlich, Lydia Becker, Lucian E. Dervan, Michael P. Donnelly, Annabelle Frazier, Meredith Gallen, Oren Gazal-Ayal, Rebecca K. Helm, Brian D. Johnson, Emi MacLean, Norman L. Reimer, Miko M. Wilford, Tina M. Zottoli
{"title":"Urgent issues and prospects in guilty plea research and practice","authors":"Allison D. Redlich, Lydia Becker, Lucian E. Dervan, Michael P. Donnelly, Annabelle Frazier, Meredith Gallen, Oren Gazal-Ayal, Rebecca K. Helm, Brian D. Johnson, Emi MacLean, Norman L. Reimer, Miko M. Wilford, Tina M. Zottoli","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12306","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12306","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Criminal legal systems around the world rely heavily on defendants foregoing their right to trial and pleading guilty. However, legal scholars, social scientists, and practitioners have identified and empirically examined numerous problems with pleas, such as the high potential for coercion, innocent defendants falsely pleading guilty, and undue incentives in exchange for accepting plea offer. In this article, leading guilty plea experts (practitioners and researchers) were asked to identify what they considered to be the most urgent questions surrounding pleas. Across nine commentaries, three primary themes emerged. First were calls for increased transparency in pleas, specific to rules of discovery and access to exculpatory information, and in uncovering the hidden nature of the plea negotiation process. Second were concepts of fairness and voluntariness, such as uncounseled pleas, particularly for misdemeanour defendants, and the dubious assumptions made by courts regarding the presumption of voluntariness. Third was the theme of fair and just outcomes, particularly false guilty pleas. Four of the commentaries focused on innocence, describing and encouraging more research on the factors that increase false guilty pleas, including excessive plea discounts, specialized sentencing offers for juvenile defendants, and ‘time-served’ offers, either to induce initial guilty pleas (pre-trial phase) or to avoid official exonerations of those wrongly convicted (post-conviction phase). Across all commentaries, experts identified areas in need of future research, both in continuing to understand the problems known to plague systems of pleas and in developing improved methods to ensure the guilty plea process is transparent, voluntary, and just.</p>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":"193-211"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12306","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144832963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniella K. Cash, Megan H. Papesh, Tiffany D. Russell, Alan T. Harrison
{"title":"The effects of confidence consistency and delay on perceptions of eyewitness credibility","authors":"Daniella K. Cash, Megan H. Papesh, Tiffany D. Russell, Alan T. Harrison","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12316","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lcrp.12316","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Abundant research has explored the conditions under which eyewitnesses are likely to identify guilty versus innocent suspects. Research suggests there is a relationship between witness confidence and accuracy, such that confident witnesses tend to be accurate, and this relationship can persist even across delays between witnessed events and identification procedures. Emerging research suggests that witnesses' metacognitive evaluations made prior to identification procedures are also diagnostic of accuracy. These findings about eyewitness memory are valuable, but it is unclear how these factors are evaluated when assessing witness confidence and accuracy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Two studies using a mock-officer paradigm examined how perceptions of witness confidence and accuracy are affected by variations in confidence both before and after identifications (Experiments 1 and 2), and the delay between the crime and the identification (Experiment 2).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results and Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Although high confidence at either time increased perceived confidence and accuracy, longer delays between the event and identification procedure lowered ratings of perceived confidence and accuracy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 2","pages":"335-348"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144832623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}