Table 2

Differences in MAQ Misbeliefs between MRM Impaired and Likely Intact Reasoning Groups

MAQ ScaleItemMisbelief (Inaccurate Response)% of Errorsχ2Pd
ImpairedLikely Intact
Adversarial perspective on arrest9.You can disagree with the police when they are wrong. (F)
20.I should talk to a lawyer before I talk to the police. (F)
28.A person should never admit to a crime. (F)48.633.
31.You should not answer any questions or sign anything until you have a lawyer. (F)
37.Staying silent is the same as saying I'm guilty. (T)
57.The police usually pressure a person to confess. (F)
Trusting law enforcement7.Telling the police what you know can only help you. (T)22.011.710.13< .01.42
15.If the police promise me help, then it's okay to talk. (T)
23.During an interrogation the police have your best interests in mind. (T)19.16.511.67< .01.68
29.The police will not pressure a person into confessing. (T)10.61.312.21< .011.21
30.Talking to the police is a good idea. (T)27.010.513.40< .01.63
56.A person should always do what the police say. (T)37.625.
  • 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.