The Supreme Court in its landmark decision of Miranda v. United States established constitutional protections for suspects in custody. While mapping out the basic components of Miranda warnings (e.g., right to silence), the Court has consistently declined to specify the language of such warnings or waivers. As a result, more than 800 different versions of Miranda have been identified that vary markedly in length from 21 to 408 words and reading level from grade 2.8 and post-college. In an analysis of detainees with observations taken at multiple time points following arrest, this project identifies psychological vulnerabilities that impair Miranda comprehension and subsequent decision making. Potential vulnerabilities include limited intelligence, learning disabilities, and mental disorders. Beyond psychological vulnerabilities, suspects may have impaired thinking patterns, called cognitive distortions, which affect their abilities to rationally decide whether to give up their rights to silence and counsel. This project examines how psychological vulnerabilities and cognitive distortions may impair suspects' constitutional protections. They are addressed for representative Miranda warnings written at easy (less than grade 6), moderate (grade 8 to 10), and difficult (grade 12 or higher) reading levels. They are also evaluated for the type of warning presentation (oral versus written). A second objective is the development of simplified Miranda warnings that can facilitate procedural justice by informing custodial suspects with easily understood information. In doing so, the study identifies prototypical components of Miranda warnings that are brief, clear, and easily read. These simplified warnings are tested for their clarity and ease of comprehension. Finally, the research is expected to contribute to the development of reliable and valid Miranda measures for the standardized assessment of Miranda vocabulary, comprehension of Miranda warnings, and decision-making about Miranda waivers.
