Remaining silent during interrogation

In many Western jurisdictions, criminal suspects undergoing police interrogations have the right to remain silent. In this experiment, we examined the effects of remaining silent during police questioning on laypersons' perceptions of a suspect. Participants (N = 126) read one of three mock-interview transcripts (i.e. admission, denial or silence) and indicated the extent to which they agreed or disagreed that a male suspect in a missing person case was guilty, cooperative, trustworthy and rational. Participants expressed stronger agreement that the suspect was guilty when he admitted guilt than when he denied involvement or remained silent. When the suspect remained silent, participants viewed the suspect as less cooperative than when the suspect denied or admitted guilt and as less rational than when the suspect denied committing the crime. Our findings provide some support for the notion that remaining silent during police questioning may be viewed unfavourably by external observers.