Why Do People Confess to Crimes They Didn't Commit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jedishrfu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the psychological aspects of false confessions, particularly in the context of the Reid Technique used by law enforcement. It highlights the challenges software engineers face in gathering accurate information during troubleshooting, drawing parallels between eliciting confessions and understanding technical failures. A specific incident involving a race condition illustrates the collaborative efforts between a developer and a tester, culminating in a successful resolution of a persistent issue. This exchange emphasizes the importance of communication and respect in technical environments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Reid Technique in interrogation
  • Familiarity with software testing methodologies
  • Knowledge of race conditions in software development
  • Experience in troubleshooting technical issues
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the psychological principles behind false confessions
  • Learn about effective software testing strategies
  • Study race condition detection and prevention techniques
  • Explore advanced troubleshooting methods in software engineering
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for software engineers, testers, psychologists interested in interrogation techniques, and anyone involved in technical problem-solving and collaboration.

Physics news on Phys.org
As a software engineer, I often need to elicit information from others: Requirements, technical specs, how something failed, etc.
Sometimes it's easy. More often it is not. Even the most careful, cooperative conversation can be misleading. The fact that the Reid Technique is used by law enforcement to collect such critical information is scary.
The best confessions are the ones that reveal "guilty information" - information that is to available to people not involved in the crime.

The Science Mag story talks about tracking down a potential problem with a computer crash. I have certainly been there. It is possible for some people to accurately reproduce exactly what they have mistakenly done (assuming they ever discovered it), but it's not common. In the best of cases, the person can, through experimentation, reproduce the problem. But failing that, the best I can do is understand and capture exactly what they are saying and know that in all probability, what they are saying is basically substantive - but from the point of view of someone that was caught off guard by the situation.
 
Last edited:
I got to see first hand a pro tester and developer duke it out in a friendly way.

The tester found a race condition when keys were hit in a certain order. The developer confidently fixed it but the tester typed a little faster and it occurred again.

The last battle before it was finally fixed.

The developer brought in his code and the tester was typing furiously think ” Flight of the Bumblebee “ and after a few minutes boom it broke again.

A day later and a new design fixed it once and for all never to reappear.

No customer was harmed that day but the tester and and developer found great reasons to really respect each others profession.

The tester moved on to become a manager of managers and the developer moved on to other software ventures.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
969
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
14K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K