Cited by 50Deception detection and forensic psychologyEthics and Social Impacts of AITorture, Ethics, and Law

The application of artificial intelligence in police interrogations: An analysis addressing the proposed effect AI has on racial and gender bias, cooperation, and false confessions

Noriega, Maria·2020·Futures

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.futures.2019.102510

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noriega, M.
Affiliations
University of Oslo (NO)
Corresponding author
Noriega, Maria
Venue
Futures
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
117
Pages
102510
ISSN
0016-3287 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2981659567
Cited by
50
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2
FWCI
7.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Futures (publishedVersion)
  • Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Oslo’s
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Torture, Ethics, and Law
Keywords
artificial intelligence in policing, police interrogation, false confessions, racial bias, gender bias, suspect cooperation, coercive interrogation, voluntariness of confession

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