The impact of individual differences on investigative hypothesis generation under time pressure
| Author | Laurence Alison,Paul Christiansen,Sunghwan Kim |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461355720905716 |
| Published date | 01 June 2020 |
| Date | 01 June 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
International Journal of
Police Science & Management
The impact of individual differences on
2020, Vol. 22(2) 171–182
ª The Author(s) 2020
investigative hypothesis generation
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
under time pressure
DOI: 10.1177/1461355720905716
journals.sagepub.com/home/psm
Sunghwan Kim
University of Liverpool, UK
Laurence Alison
University of Liverpool, UK
Paul Christiansen
University of Liverpool, UK
Abstract
When decisions are made under time pressure, individuals tend to reduce the number of hypotheses generated to explain
and solve problems. This research investigates the extent to which individual differences in (a) domain-specific experience,
(b) fluid intelligence, (c) need for closure (NFC), and (d) time urgency moderated the effect of time pressure on
investigative hypothesis generation. Korean detectives (N ¼ 133) participated in simulated investigative scenarios. To
induce the perception of time pressure, one group was informed that the task would have to be completed under time
pressure (N ¼ 66), whereas the other group did not receive this instruction (N ¼ 67); although both groups had the same
amount of time). Outcomes included the number and quality of hypotheses generated for solving the case. The quality of
hypotheses generated was measured against criteria established by expert detectives. Results revealed that time pressure
directly decreased the quantity and quality of hypotheses generated. In the relationships, low time urgency moderated the
effect of time pressure on the number and quality of hypotheses generated, also low NFC moderated the impact of time
pressure on the number of hypotheses generated. Furthermore, the most experienced detectives were least affected by
the negative association between time pressure and the quality of hypotheses generated. The findings suggest lower time
urgency, lower NFC and more experience are adaptive ‘protective’ factors against the negative impact of time pressure on
hypothesis generation within high stakes and uncertain situations such as rape investigations.
Keywords
Time pressure, individual differences, hypothesis generation, police investigations, sex crimes
Submitted 25 Jul 2019, Revise received 03 Oct 2019, accepted 09 Dec 2019
Introduction
demand and the danger caused by sex offenders, otherwise,
the fear level of citizens may increase due to the possibility
The duties of police officers are generally carried out within
of further crimes. Moreover, irresponsibility by law
time-pressured environments (Ask and Granhag, 2005), par-
ticularly when investigating violent crimes, where case
demand, high stakes and external requirements all necessi-
tate a rapid response. In South Korea, the number of reported
Corresponding author:
Laurence Alison, Institute of Psychology, Society and Health, University of
rapes has risen 12% over the past five years (Korean
Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool
National Police Agency [KNPA], 2018). Criminal justice
L69 7ZA, UK.
agencies have been required to swiftly counteract this
Email: l.j.alison@liverpool.ac.uk
172
International Journal of Police Science & Management 22(2)
enforcement authorities may be criticized by the public and
hypothesis generation may be the most significant compo-
mass media. Although the time-critical atmosphere is wide-
nent in investigations as it can affect all the investigative
spread in police work, there is a lack of research exploring
cognitions that come after. O’Neill and Milne (2014) pro-
how time pressure influences the performance of officers.
posed that such reasoning and decision-making abilities are
Indeed, O’Hare (1992) argued that dealing with time pres-
critical to investigative success. However, it was pointed
sure is one of the most critical factors to affect individual
out that psychological studies on investigations paid little
capacities within complex and dynamic surroundings.
attention to the inferential process of detectives (Fahsing
Therefore, time pressure may have relevance to policies
and Ask, 2018).
concerning training and selection in law enforcement. If
Hypothesis generation may be particularly sensitive to
time pressure plays a negative role in detectives’ work due
time pressure. According to Macquet (2009), time pressure
to the increasing demands placed upon them, it seems clear
undermines individuals’ flexibility by interrupting their
that they should receive appropriate training to counter its
capability to generate alternative hypotheses and
harmful effects within criminal investigations. On the other
hypothesis-testing schemes. Ask and Granhag (2005) dis-
hand, if time pressure brings about operational excellence,
covered that, under time pressure, officers use heuristics to
imposing a strict deadline or pushing officers to clear cases
reduce their cognitive load and consequently, generate
may be beneficial during training (Alison et al., 2013a).
fewer hypotheses. Specifically, Ask and Granhag argued
Furthermore, if specific individual factors (e.g. intelli-
that time pressure increases confirmation bias, whereby
gence) of detectives are associated with investigative cap-
officers tend to adopt their initial assumption as the most
abilities under time pressure, such findings could be
likely hypothesis and overlook alternative interpretations
applied to workforce selection tests within the criminal
of forensic evidence. Likewise, Alison et al. (2013a)
investigation department (CID). Westera et al. (2013)
demonstrated that time pressure reduces the number of
demonstrated that the success of investigations depends
hypotheses generated through investigative scenarios (for
highly on the cognitive abilities of investigators. However,
similar results in medical settings, see Dougherty and Hun-
those subjects have not been examined sufficiently under
ter, 2003). However, there has been no research on the
time pressure to date.
effectiveness of hypotheses generated in the time-
pressured investigation. Moreover, although detectives
generate fewer hypotheses under time pressure, the quality
Hypothesis generation under time pressure
of hypotheses generated may be retained according to the
A police investigation encompasses a wide range of respon-
internal factors (e.g. experience) of detectives.
sibilities. One of its significant aspects is that investigators
often need to deal with incomplete and contradictory infor-
The role of individual differences
mation to form hypotheses about what happened within a
case and to prioritize actions effectively (Alison et al.,
Time perception. Dougherty et al. (2003) argued that the
2007). A criminal investigation can be conceptualized as
perception of time availability is non-objective, being depen-
a series of information-processing tasks, such as hypothesis
dent on how individuals cognitively estimate lapses of time.
generation, decision-making and task prioritization. Canter
For example, compared with non-time-urgent individuals,
and Young (2009) described these as the three central com-
time-urgent counterparts consistently judged that 5 minutes
ponents of the investigation cycle. This supports that
had elapsed, despite only 3 minutes having passed in total
hypothesis generation is primary investigative work to infer
(Dougherty et al., 2003). The overestimated passage of time
diverse factors such as the motives, criminal behaviour and
can exert an escalating pressure on the cognitive process
suspects’ profiles. Wright (2013) discovered that detectives
(Freedman and Edwards, 1988), and in combination with
generate hypotheses regarding the type of crimes based on
external time pressure and an increasing workload, it may
situational information during initial investigations. Cook
hinder the mental operations of individuals (Rastegary and
and Tattersall (2008) also stated that hypothesis generation
Landy, 1993). Furthermore, individuals tend to actively
is an essential procedure to establish the most likely
measure the passage of time when they feel time pressure.
assumptions for what may have occurred. Therefore,
Consequently, split attention and fewer cognitive resources
hypothesis generation leads to the development of various
could be used in a primary task (Zakay, 1993). Thus, low
explanations for an offence, enabling an investigator to
time urgency may be advantageous to manage cognitive
retain an open mind. Based on the hypotheses generated,
resources restricted for generating hypotheses.
officers may finally make critical decisions (e.g. arresting a
suspect) to progress the investigation. Given this, it was
Experience. Domain-specific experience is another factor
argued that low hypothesis generation is harmful to
that may influence the generation of hypotheses. There
decision-making (Ask, 2006; Macquet, 2009). Thus,
have been various research results in regard to the
Kim et al.
173
association between ‘experience’ and ‘hypothesis genera-
contrast, some previous research suggested that cognitive
tion’. Notably, Fahsing and Karl (2016) highlighted that
ability is not significantly associated with individual per-
experienced detectives generated more investigative
formance in law enforcement (O’Neill, 2011; Ono et al.,
hypotheses and actions than novice detectives. In medical
2011; Salgado et al., 2003). As such, it remains controver-
services, there was a positive relationship between years of
sial whether officers’ fluid intelligence affects their work
clinical...
To continue reading
Request your trial