Testing a theoretical definition of coercion with an experimental plea negotiation paradigm

Abstract Objectives We tested the behavioral effects of theoretically coercive plea negotiation scenarios on mock defendant decision-making and perceptions using a novel paradigm. Methods We conducted an experimental plea negotiation study to address how the theoretically coercive elements of constraints, conditional offers, and conditional threats impact plea decision-making of guilty and innocent defendants. Community member participants ( N = 316) acted as mock defendants and negotiated a plea deal with trained confederate prosecutors and defense attorneys. Results We found that conditional offers and guilt status significantly increased plea acceptance. Guilty participants were over 16 times more likely to accept a plea than innocent ones. Notably, 32.9% of innocent participants accepted a plea when a conditional offer was present, compared to 5.0% when absent. Conclusions This research advances our understanding of which plea tactics and elements may place innocent defendants at the greatest risk for involuntary and false guilty pleas.