How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite suggestions that autistic individuals' behavioral characteristics may arouse suspicion and undermine credibility during police and courtroom questioning, specific contributing behaviors have not been identified. We examined whether (a) suspects' figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations led to unfavorable evaluations, especially for autistic suspects, (b) evaluations of autistic and nonautistic suspects reflected the observer's diagnostic status as predicted by the double empathy hypothesis, and (c) evaluations were predicted by expectancy violations theory. HYPOTHESES: We predicted harsher evaluations of suspects (a) with figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations, particularly for autistic suspects, (b) when the diagnostic status of observers and suspects differed, and (c) following violations of expected behavior. METHOD: s = 125 and 125) watched online interviews with autistic or nonautistic chatroom participants suspected of computer hacking. Suspects with relatively high or low levels of either figurative language difficulties (Experiment 1) or speech hesitations (Experiment 2) were rated on suspiciousness, credibility, guilt, and expectancy violations. RESULTS: Harsher evaluations were detected for autistic than nonautistic male suspects and when autistic suspects displayed more marked speech hesitations. The observer's diagnostic status did not affect evaluations of suspects, but expectancy violations did, regardless of the suspect's autism diagnostic status. CONCLUSIONS: Male autistic suspects, and autistic suspects displaying more pronounced speech hesitations, appear vulnerable to negative evaluations. More extreme expectancy violations may exacerbate such evaluations. The double empathy hypothesis was not supported, but findings aligned with expectancy violations theory predictions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law and Human Behavior
Published
2026-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000679
Primary Topic
Deception detection and forensic psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.

Alliyza Lim, Katie Logos, Neil Brewer, Robyn L. Young et al.
Law and Human Behavior
Deception detection and forensic psychology
article

How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.

Alliyza Lim, Katie Logos, Neil Brewer, Robyn L. Young, Carmen A. Lucas
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Despite suggestions that autistic individuals' behavioral characteristics may arouse suspicion and undermine credibility during police and courtroom questioning, specific contributing behaviors have not been identified. We examined whether (a) suspects' figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations led to unfavorable evaluations, especially for autistic suspects, (b) evaluations of autistic and nonautistic suspects reflected the observer's diagnostic status as predicted by the double empathy hypothesis, and (c) evaluations were predicted by expectancy violations theory. HYPOTHESES: We predicted harsher evaluations of suspects (a) with figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations, particularly for autistic suspects, (b) when the diagnostic status of observers and suspects differed, and (c) following violations of expected behavior. METHOD: s = 125 and 125) watched online interviews with autistic or nonautistic chatroom participants suspected of computer hacking. Suspects with relatively high or low levels of either figurative language difficulties (Experiment 1) or speech hesitations (Experiment 2) were rated on suspiciousness, credibility, guilt, and expectancy violations. RESULTS: Harsher evaluations were detected for autistic than nonautistic male suspects and when autistic suspects displayed more marked speech hesitations. The observer's diagnostic status did not affect evaluations of suspects, but expectancy violations did, regardless of the suspect's autism diagnostic status. CONCLUSIONS: Male autistic suspects, and autistic suspects displaying more pronounced speech hesitations, appear vulnerable to negative evaluations. More extreme expectancy violations may exacerbate such evaluations. The double empathy hypothesis was not supported, but findings aligned with expectancy violations theory predictions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Law and Human Behavior
Flinders University (AU), Adelaide University (AU), The University of Adelaide (AU)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Deception detection and forensic psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.