Recognizing Cognitive Biases Improves Investigations
/Everyone is affected by cognitive biases. As Beth Mohr, CFE, explained during her early morning session on the second day of the 35th Annual ACFE Global Fraud Conference, our brains are always thinking, and we are limited in what we can take in. We create mental shortcuts, called heuristics, but sometimes this can lead to systemic errors in thinking, or biases.
We display cognitive bias when we only pay attention to news stories that confirm our opinions or automatically trust people more if they are authority figures. We may sometimes even subconsciously think people who are more attractive are nicer and more intelligent.
Most of us would like to think we can put aside our own bias. It is much easier to point out bias in others. However, Mohr asserts that when it comes to our biases, we actually have a blind spot. Biases are operating in the background of our minds, and it is when investigators recognize this potential that they will be able to become better investigators.
Cognitive Biases Affect Investigators
Mohr explains that confirmation bias occurs when an investigator seeks out information that will support an outcome they want to happen. This is demonstrated in cases proven to be wrongful convictions. It leads to investigators interrogating people with the believe that they are guilty and insisting that any denials must be lies. This can result in problematic false confessions because the person interrogated sees no other way out.
Anchoring bias is when an investigator forms an opinion based on a first impression and holds to that opinion even when other evidence is presented. When an investigator continues to hold an opinion even when proven wrong, such as with DNA evidence confirming a suspect’s innocence, that’s a demonstration of commitment bias.
“As investigators, we only see what we’re looking for,” says Mohr.
Implicit bias is a distorting lens that affects our behavior. “If you have this, it means you were raised in a culture,” Mohr jokingly told the audience. Unchecked it can lead to unequal treatment of people based on cultural differences. She asserts that unless you question it, you are not going to see it. Recognizing implicit bias is not just another way to call someone racist, Mohr argues. The better reaction is to do something about it.
Combatting Cognitive Biases
Mohr insists investigators should be asking themselves, “What else is there – what don’t I know?” Often, if investigators have seen a certain crime, they expect to see that crime again. Many will be tempted to say, “As fraud experts, we know fraud when we see it, and this is fraud.”
This cognitive bias can hinder investigations and lead to false confessions. According to the Innocence Project, 29% of U.S. cases where a convicted suspect was exonerated by DNA involved a false confession. This means that in many cases, an interrogator decided someone committed the crime and it is the only possibility they were willing to consider. Mohr explained that in the past, using false evidence ploys and telling people they have failed an “infallible” lie detector test was a legal tactic to get confessions.
The better investigators, says Mohr, will “be willing to challenge their own notions of reality.” Check against statements like “it’s definitely fraud” and “we need a confession to close this case – go get a confession.” When investigators look for exculpatory and inculpatory evidence and try to disprove their own initial theories in a case, it will make them better investigators.