Article Figures & Data
Tables
Exerciseda (n = 436) Waivedb (n = 389) F P d Age 32.70 (10.83) 32.50 (10.90) 0.07 .79 .02 Education level 11.73 (2.00) 11.68 (1.91) 0.13 .72 .03 Arrests 13.05 (28.81) 10.76 (20.05) 1.17 .19 .08 Psychiatric hospitalizations 0.55 (2.34) 0.85 (2.92) 2.40 .12 .12 Full-scale IQc 91.24 (12.48) 91.46 (13.39) 0.05 .82 .02 Verbal IQc 88.27 (12.48) 88.75 (13.47) 0.27 .60 .04 Reading graded 8.64 (3.21) 9.15 (3.28) 4.91 .03 .16 Listening graded 8.90 (2.90) 9.21 (2.99) 2.19 .14 .10 Data are presented as mean (SD).
↵a Exercised = Exercised Miranda rights (i.e., did not talk to police without lawyer); the dataset does not distinguish those who formally invoked their rights from those who implicitly exercised them by declining to talk.
↵b Waived = Waived Miranda rights (i.e., talked to police without lawyer).
↵c Full-scale IQ and Verbal IQ are based on the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence.
↵d Reading and Listening Grade levels are based on the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (2nd edition).
- Table 2
Differences in MAQ Misbeliefs between MRM Impaired and Likely Intact Reasoning Groups
MAQ Scale Item Misbelief (Inaccurate Response) % of Errors χ2 P d Impaired Likely Intact Adversarial perspective on arrest 9. You can disagree with the police when they are wrong. (F) 16.9 6.5 7.86 .02 .60 20. I should talk to a lawyer before I talk to the police. (F) 8.5 3.2 6.03 .05 .56 28. A person should never admit to a crime. (F) 48.6 33.5 7.27 .03 .35 31. You should not answer any questions or sign anything until you have a lawyer. (F) 9.9 2.6 7.32 .03 .79 37. Staying silent is the same as saying I'm guilty. (T) 12.1 3.2 9.13 .01 .78 57. The police usually pressure a person to confess. (F) 25.0 16.1 4.67 .10 .30 Trusting law enforcement 7. Telling the police what you know can only help you. (T) 22.0 11.7 10.13 < .01 .42 15. If the police promise me help, then it's okay to talk. (T) 6.3 3.2 8.56 .01 .39 23. During an interrogation the police have your best interests in mind. (T) 19.1 6.5 11.67 < .01 .68 29. The police will not pressure a person into confessing. (T) 10.6 1.3 12.21 < .01 1.21 30. Talking to the police is a good idea. (T) 27.0 10.5 13.40 < .01 .63 56. A person should always do what the police say. (T) 37.6 25.3 5.45 .07 .32 The MRM was used for Miranda reasoning which was operationalized21 as impaired (≥ 1 item scored as 0; n = 255) and likely intact (all items scored ≥ 2 plus ≥ 1 “exercise” item scored = 3; n = 195). To facilitate interpretation, statistically significant differences and medium to large effect sizes are in bold.
MAQ, Miranda Acquiescence Questionnaire; MRM, Miranda Reasoning Measure.
- Table 3
MAQ Differences on APA and TLE Scores between Impaired and Intact Cognitive Abilities
Clinical Variable MAQ (n for Impaired, Likely Intact) Impaireda Likely Intactb F P d Full-scale IQ APA (67, 330) 4.55 (1.35) 5.13 (0.88) 19.45 < .001 .59 TLE (68, 335) 4.29 (1.73) 5.23 (1.06) 34.92 < .001 .79 Verbal Comprehension Index APA (97, 269) 4.76 (1.27) 5.14 (0.87) 10.43 .001 .38 TLE (94, 273) 4.52 (1.66) 5.30 (0.97) 30.59 < .001 .66 Reading grade APA (144, 197) 4.91 (1.19) 5.07 (0.86) 2.86 .06 .19 TLE (144, 197) 4.56 (1.60) 5.28 (1.05) 15.13 < .001 .43 Listening grade APA (137, 198) 4.84 (1.16) 5.06 (0.96) 6.37 .002 .28 TLE (136, 197) 4.42 (1.58) 5.30 (1.00) 23.48 < .001 .54 Differences for the impaired and likely intact groups are presented as mean (SD). For intelligence, full-scale IQ score of 85 was used with a 95% CI (± 5 points): < 80 were categorized as impaired and ≥ 90 as intact. The same criterion was employed with the Verbal Comprehension Index. Given the low grade level for the MAQ, tertiles (highest and lowest thirds) were used. To facilitate interpretation, statistically significant differences and medium effect sizes are in bold.
↵a Means for impaired cognitive abilities were 71.86 (full-scale IQ), 71.24 (Verbal Comprehension Index), 2.11 (reading grade), and 2.03 (listening grade).
↵b Means for intact cognitive abilities were 100.74 (full-scale IQ), 99.80 (Verbal Comprehension Index), 10.97 (reading grade), and 10.70 (listening grade).
APA, adversarial perspective on arrest; MAQ, Miranda Acquiescence Questionnaire; TLE, trusting law enforcement.
- Table 4
MAQ Differences on APA and TLE Scores between Impaired and Likely Intact Miranda Abilities
Miranda Abilities MAQ (n for Impaired, Likely Intact) Impaired Likely Intact F P d Miranda Vocabulary Scale APA (43, 264) 4.51 (1.45) 5.16 (0.87) 16.57 < .001 .67 TLE (42, 266) 4.14 (1.63) 5.29 (1.00) 39.04 < .001 1.04 Miranda Comprehension Template APA (18, 145) 4.61 (1.24) 5.05 (0.97) 3.02 .08 .43 TLE (18, 148) 3.56 (1.82) 5.06 (1.27) 20.22 < .001 1.12 Miranda Quiz Primary Total APA (71, 102) 4.82 (1.20) 5.15 (0.94) 2.77 .07 .26 TLE (72, 99) 4.51 (1.47) 5.22 (1.06) 9.13 < .001 .47 MRM-Waive APA (100, 279) 4.85 (1.04) 5.24 (0.85) 10.41 < .001 .38 TLE (102, 275) 4.86 (1.26) 5.24 (1.08) 8.71 < .001 .34 MRM-Exercise APA (47, 266) 4.55 (1.16) 5.23 (0.89) 11.64 < .001 .54 TLE (49, 263) 4.53 (1.43) 5.26 (1.00) 10.37 < .001 .50 Differences for the impaired and likely intact groups are presented as mean (SD). The Miranda Vocabulary Scale compared failed (≥ 50% of items scored 0 or 1) versus likely adequate (≤ 20% of items scored 0 or 1, plus average item score ≥ 3). In addition, the Miranda Comprehension Template was operationalized as failed (< 50%) versus likely adequate (≥ 70%) comprehension. For the Miranda Quiz Primary Total, tertiles were used with failed being set at Miranda Quiz < 11 (i.e., ≥ 26.7% of Miranda misconceptions) and likely adequate at Miranda Quiz > 12 (i.e., ≤ 20.0% of Miranda misconceptions). To facilitate interpretation, statistically significant differences and medium to large effect sizes are in bold.
APA, adversarial perspective on arrest; MAQ, Miranda Acquiescence Questionnaire; MRM, Miranda Reasoning Measure; TLE, trusting law enforcement.
