CANBERRA, Oct. 9 (Xinhua) -- Both autistic and non-autistic suspects may be judged more harshly when their behavior during police interviews differs from observers' expectations, a study led by Australia's Flinders University has found.
The study, published in the journal Law and Human Behavior, examined how autistic and non-autistic observers evaluated autistic and non-autistic suspects in mock police interviews involving accusations of computer hacking, according to a university statement released on Friday.
Participants rated suspects on suspiciousness, credibility, guilt and whether their behavior met expectations.
Researchers found no decisive evidence that autistic people were more likely to be judged harshly because of "unusual" behaviors associated with autism, or that people were better at interpreting the intentions of suspects who shared their diagnostic status.
The researchers said the findings suggested that how much a suspect's behavior violates expectations about how a suspect should act may influence judgments, regardless of whether the person is autistic.
The findings highlighted the need for police and courts to guard against assumptions of guilt based on suspects' communication styles and interpretations of suspects' responses, intentions and motivations.
The findings suggested that some autistic suspects may face particular credibility risks in investigative or legal contexts, but the same probably applies to some non-autistic suspects.
Co-author Flinders University clinical psychologist Alliyza Lim said communication behavior may affect perceived credibility without necessarily providing evidence about whether the person actually committed an offence. ■