Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 263

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coerced confessions and the jury: An experimental test of the "harmless error" rule.

Kassin, Saul M., Sukel, Holly·1997·Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

Prompted by the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Arizona v. Fulminante (1991), two studies evaluated the proposition that an erroneously admitted coerced confession can be considered “harmless error.” Mock jurors read transcripts of a murder trial containing a confession that was (1) elicited in a high- or low-pressure interrogation, and (2) ruled admissible or inadmissible by the judge (no-confession control groups were also included). As prescribed by law, jurors saw the high-pressure confession as less voluntary, correctly recalled the judge's ruling, and reported that it had less influence on their decisions. On verdicts, however, the confession increased the conviction rate—even when it was seen as coerced, even when it was stricken from the record, and even when jurors said it had no influence. These results suggest that appellate courts should exercise caution in applying the harmless error rule to the admission of coerced confessions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1024814009769

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 263

Metadata

Authors
Kassin, S. M., & Sukel, H.
Venue
Law and Human Behavior
Published
1997-02
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
27-46
ISSN
  • 0147-7307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-661X
OpenAlex
W2064282221
Cited by
263
References
7
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Coerced confessions and the jury: An experimental test of the "harmless error" rule. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1023/a:1024814009769
The paper
Kassin, S. M., & Sukel, H. (1997). Coerced confessions and the jury: An experimental test of the "harmless error" rule. Law and Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1024814009769

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.