The online disinhibition effect (Suler, 2004) is purported to explain why people behave differently online than in ‘real life’. This study explores whether the effect can be used to provide a partial explanation for online sexual communication with children. Online disinhibition scores are compared between two groups; a general public sample and those being investigated, arrested, charged or convicted for crimes relating to online sexual communication with minors. Qualitative interviews were conducted with a subsample of the offending participants to gain more insight and understanding of how online disinhibition is experienced. Data collection is ongoing but preliminary analysis shows a significant difference in online disinhibition scores between the two groups, with the offending population scoring higher. Five qualitative themes (identity, reality and fantasy, consequences, mental visualizations and conversational styles) have been developed showing how online disinhibition can provide a partial but not complete explanation for this type of offending behaviour.

The memory conformity effect occurs when a witness observes a given incident (e.g. a crime), then talks about it with other witnesses and as a result of such discussion their memories are distorted. Therefore, this phenomenon may contribute to unreliable testimonies, which remain the leading cause of incorrect court decisions. Consequently, the major objective of the presented research was to test three methods of reducing memory conformity.
240 participants were examined in pairs. After the pair introduced mutual misinformation, one of the three techniques of reducing memory conformity was applied: (1) extended warning against misinformation; (2) training about memory fallibility or (3) a technique that involves demonstrating to participants that their memory is sometimes fallible.
It was confirmed that implementation of extended warning against misinformation eliminated the memory conformity effect, while the application of training about memory fallibility and demonstrating technique led to a reduction of the studied phenomenon.

Employability is important for reducing recidivism and is therefore a key objective for practitioners within the criminal justice system. Understanding the cognitive decision-making process behind choosing to hire (or reject) a candidate is necessary for being able to later develop new techniques, campaigns, or approaches which enhance employability. This talk provides an overview of the research into employability for those with a prior criminal conviction. Specifically, we evaluate the use of correspondence testing, in-person audit studies, and empirical experiments which seek to help us understand employability. We also discuss the implications of these findings for practitioners and policymakers, offering recommendations for optimal research practices to improve employability outcomes and reduce recidivism.

The National Registry of Exonerations is an online database of more than 3,600 exonerations of wrongful convictions in the United States beginning in 1989. The Registry collects data on six contributing factors: Mistaken Witness Identification, False Confession, False/Misleading Forensic Evidence, Perjury/False Accusation, Official Misconduct, and Inadequate Legal Defense.

This presentation will address Mistaken Witness Identification (MWID) and False Accusation (FA): the differences between these two categories and how the Registry codes this data.

As of November 1, 2024, MWID (976) played a part in 27% of all exonerations (3,600). Of these, 13% (127) were recanted after the convictions.

During that same period, False accusations (1,833) played a part in 51% of all exonerations (3,600. Of these, 40% (729) involved recantations.

Of the 1,833 False Accusations, 48% (888) were cases in which no crime actually occurred. Of these 888 False Accusations, 223% (208) were recanted after the convictions.