• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Judgement and Decision-Making in the Controversial Dr Haneef Counter-Terrorism Operation: A Simulation Approach

    Author(s)
    Vogel, Lauren Katherina
    Kebbell, Mark Rhys
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Kebbell, Mark R.
    Year published
    2011
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    An experimental-simulation approach was utilised in order to examine decisions made by investigators in the controversial Australian counter-terrorism operation concerning Dr Mohamed Haneef. The police were criticised by the media and contemporary commentators in regards to their handling of this operation due to the perception that they had made poor decisions and thus demonstrated bias against an innocent individual. To determine the quality of these critical investigative decisions, 81 participants were presented with a simulated counter-terrorism vignette based on a de-identified version of the Haneef case. Participants ...
    View more >
    An experimental-simulation approach was utilised in order to examine decisions made by investigators in the controversial Australian counter-terrorism operation concerning Dr Mohamed Haneef. The police were criticised by the media and contemporary commentators in regards to their handling of this operation due to the perception that they had made poor decisions and thus demonstrated bias against an innocent individual. To determine the quality of these critical investigative decisions, 81 participants were presented with a simulated counter-terrorism vignette based on a de-identified version of the Haneef case. Participants were required to make judgements concerning whether a suspect, whose cousin was the instigator of a terrorist attack, was involved in and/or aware of this attack. The vignette was manipulated so that guilt-suggestive information was presented either early or late and so that the suspect was either cooperative or uncooperative throughout an interview with a police officer. This was in order to model the influence of confirmation bias and co-operation, respectively. Overall, participants judged the fictional terrorist suspect to be reasonably guilty of supplying material support to a terrorist organisation, of having prior knowledge of the terrorist organisation, and of having a medium level of risk of potential future involvement in terrorism. Participants judged the suspect to be slightly but significantly lower on these criteria if he was cooperative throughout the police interview.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
    Volume
    18
    Issue
    4
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2010.543401
    Subject
    Forensic psychology
    Cognitive and computational psychology
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/41384
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander