Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

the meaning of a Mirandawarning, his or her appre-

ciation of the consequences of the decision to waive or

exercise those rights may suffer given his or her rela-

tive level of maturity and development. It is perhaps

not surprising, then, that research demonstrates that

the majority of young persons opt to waive their rights

when being questioned by the police. Interestingly,

results from Canadian and U.S. studies have shown

that with increased rights understanding, young per-

sons are more likely to refuse to waive their rights in

the context of a criminal investigation.

Assessing Capacity to

Waive MMiirraannddaaRights

It is important to clarify that the term capacity to

waive Mirandarights does not refer to a specific legal

disposition but rather to the capacity of the defendant

to understand and waive his or her legal rights. Grisso

has described three areas of functioning pertinent to

the evaluation of capacity to waive rights, including a

suspect’s understanding of the rights warnings, the

suspect’s perceptions of the intended functions of the

Mirandarights, and the suspect’s capacities to reason

about the probable consequences of waiver or non-

waiver decisions. Researchers and evaluators have

typically assessed the suspect’s understanding of the

rights warnings by examining an individual’s under-

standing of the phrases included in a standard rights

warning. Grisso conceptualizes appreciation of the

significance of rights to comprise three main parts.

First, suspects must recognize the interrogative nature

of police questioning. Second, suspects must perceive

the defense attorney as an advocate who will defend

and advise them, and be willing to disclose confiden-

tial information to him or her (appreciation of the

right to counsel). Finally, suspects must perceive the

right to silence as a right that cannot be revoked and

that statements made by them can be used in court

(appreciation of the right to silence).

Grisso’s Instruments for Assessing Understanding

and Appreciation of MirandaRights were developed

to assist mental health professionals to examine the

capacities of individual youths or adults to waive their

Mirandarights knowingly and intelligently at the time

of their police interrogation. Three instruments assess

the individual’s understanding of a typical arrest by

asking examinees to paraphrase the meaning of each

right, compare the four elements of a typical rights

warning with a pool of statements including accurate

and inaccurate rewordings of each of the sentences,

and provide definitions of six words contained in the

interrogation warnings. Appreciation of the warnings

is evaluated in a fourth instrument, which assesses

appreciation of the importance of rights in an interro-

gation and in legal situations generally by asking

examinees to respond to pictures and vignettes

describing youths interacting with various criminal

justice figures. The instruments provide normative

data against which evaluators can compare an exami-

nee’s responses on the instruments; however the nor-

mative data are based on a sample of juveniles in

Saint Louis, Missouri, in 1980. An updated version of

these instruments,The MirandaRights Comprehension

Instruments,is currently being developed.

Consequences

Current findings from the literature underscore the need

for the provision of appropriate assistance or improve-

ment in the rights communication and the waiver

processes. Results from research conducted on juve-

niles’Mirandarights comprehension findings strongly

suggest that although a majority of youths involved in

police questioning and interrogation waive their rights,

many of them, particularly younger adolescents, may

not have the capacity to provide a valid waiver. The

consequences of poor understanding and appreciation

of arrest rights, in combination with a highly sug-

gestible young person and coercive interrogation condi-

tions, may be far ranging and logically include a greatly

increased likelihood of offering a false confession.

Youths, especially younger adolescents and preteens,

may be especially vulnerable to making false confes-

sions due to immaturity and poor judgment.

Ronald Roesch and Kaitlyn McLachlan

See also Capacity to Waive Rights; False Confessions;

Forensic Assessment; Grisso’s Instruments for Assessing

Understanding and Appreciation of MirandaRights;

Interrogation of Suspects; Videotaping Confessions

Further Readings

Feld, B. C. (2000). Juveniles’ waiver of legal rights:

Confessions,Miranda, and the right to counsel. In

T. Grisso & R. G. Schwartz (Eds.),Youth on trial:

A developmental perspective on juvenile justice

(pp. 105–138). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

58 ———Capacity to Waive MMiirraannddaa Rights

C-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:41 PM Page 58