What Will You Do When They Think It Was You? Counter-interrogation Strategies of Innocent Interviewees Under Suspicion vs. No Suspicion

Abstract The current imaginary mock-crime study examined innocent interviewees’ ( N = 128) planned counter-interrogation strategies and their willingness to disclose critical information as a function of (a) the type secondary act (irrelevant crime under investigation) they imagined having executed at scene (lawful vs. unlawful act) (b) presence suspicion directed towards interviewees (suspicion no suspicion). Results show that, be honest , was most frequently reported strategy among lawful well participants. In contrast, none participants deceptive whereas 35.9% did. When (vs. suspicion) participants, were less willing voluntarily share on true intentions scene. Consequently, seemingly easy “no suspicion” situations appear promote application more evasive behavior in might therefore put them risk being wrongfully assessed guilty investigation.