Cited by 231Deception detection and forensic psychologyDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsLegal processes and jurisprudence

Motivational sources of confirmation bias in criminal investigations: The need for cognitive closure

Ask, Karl, Granhag, P�r Anders·2005·Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling

Abstract

In two experiments, criminal investigators (N = 50) and undergraduate students (N = 68) read a set of facts from the preliminary investigation of a homicide case. Participants' initial hypothesis regarding the crime was manipulated by providing background information implying that the prime suspect had a jealousy motive or that there might be an alternative perpetrator. Students displayed a framing effect, such that guilt was ascribed to the prime suspect only when a potential motive was presented, whereas investigators did so regardless of hypothesis, thus being less sensitive to alternative interpretations. Investigators' need for cognitive closure (NFC) moderated the effect of the hypothesis on perceptions of the strength of the evidence against the prime suspect; high (v low) NFC investigators were less likely to acknowledge inconsistencies in the material when presented with a potential motive, but were more likely to do so when made aware of the possibility of an alternative perpetrator. Interpretations are somewhat clouded by the fact that dispositional NFC did not seem to affect in a consistent manner participants' motivation toward the experimental task. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jip.19

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The first source of bias is the actual evidence, the Data (Level 1 in Category A); it can create empathy and sympathy, which motivates them to solve the case and have cognitive closure.

    “The first source of bias is the actual evidence, the Data (Level 1 in Category A). It can create empathy and sympathy (for example, with the victim or/and their family), which motivates them to solve the case and have cognitive closure (Ask & Granhag, 2005).”

    From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Ask & Granhag, 2005

  • Use of reference materials causes motivation and expectations that can bias observations and interpretation of the actual evidence.

    “Thus, such use of reference materials causes motivation and expectations that then can bias the observations and interpretation of the actual evidence”

    From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Ask & Granhag, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ask, K., & Granhag, P. A.
Affiliations
University of Gothenburg (SE)
Corresponding author
Ask, Karl
Venue
Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-01
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
43-63
ISSN
  • 1544-4759 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-4767
OpenAlex
W2050689620
Cited by
231
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling (publishedVersion)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
Keywords
confirmation bias, criminal investigators, need for cognitive closure, hypothesis confirmation, framing effects, murder investigation, evidence evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review