ACCUSATION BIAS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS: COGNITIVE CAUSES, COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, AND PROCEDURAL MECHANISMS FOR ITS ELIMINATION
Keywords:
confirmatory bias, cognitive distortion, tunnel vision, confirmation bias, principle of objectivity, analysis of alternative hypotheses, proportional inadmissibility, procedural safeguardsAbstract
The article analyzes the phenomenon of the inclination to blame (accusative bias) inherent in investigator activity during criminal investigation based on a comprehensive – normative, cognitive-psychological, and institutional – approach. A comparative study of modern international (“tunnel vision” and “confirmation bias” theories), European, post-Soviet, and national doctrinal sources reveals the cognitive roots of bias. The purpose of the article is to comprehensively analyze the cognitive, comparative-legal, and institutional aspects of propensity to blame, develop a system of procedural mechanisms to eliminate it, and substantiate the possibilities of their application as a scientific innovation. The study employed normative-dogmatic, comparative-legal, systemic-structural, and sociological (survey) methods. A system of seven procedural mechanisms for eliminating inclination to blame and a methodology for its empirical justification are proposed.
References
Bazarbaeva, T. R. (2022). Realizatsiya printsipa sostyazatelnosti i ravnopraviya storon v dosudebnoy stadii ugolovnogo protsessa [Implementation of the principle of adversarial proceedings and equality of the parties at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings] (Masterʼs thesis in law). Academy of Law Enforcement Agencies under the Prosecutor Generalʼs Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Elaad, E. (2022). Tunnel vision and confirmation bias among police investigators and laypeople in hypothetical criminal contexts. SAGE Open, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095022
Lidén, M. (2023). Confirmation bias in criminal cases. Oxford University Press.
Maegherman, E., Ask, K., Horselenberg, R., & van Koppen, P. J. (2021). Test of the analysis of competing hypotheses in legal decision-making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(1), 282–289. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3738
Mamadiyev, S. N. (2009). Jinoyat ishini sudga qadar yuritishda shikoyat berish muddatlari [Time limits for filing complaints in pre-trial criminal proceedings]. Uzbek Law Review, (1–2), 50–53.
Poʻlatov, B. Kh. (2003). Prokurorning jinoyat ishlarini sudda koʻrishda ishtiroki muammolari [Problems of the prosecutorʼs participation in the consideration of criminal cases in court] (Abstract of a doctoral dissertation). Tashkent.
President of the Republic of Uzbekistan. (2026, February 16). On additional measures to consistently continue reforms and bring them to a new stage within the framework of priority directions of the countryʼs development until 2030 (Decree No. DP-21). Lex.uz. https://lex.uz/docs/8050769
Rahimov, Y. (2000). Oʻzbekiston Respublikasining Jinoyat-protsessual kodeksi asosida soʻroq qilish va koʻrsatuvlarga baho berishning protsessual-psixologik muammolari [Procedural and psychological problems of interrogation and evaluation of testimony based on the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan] (Abstract of a doctoral dissertation). Tashkent.
Rassin, E., Eerland, A., & Kuijpers, I. (2010). Letʼs find the evidence: An analogue study of confirmation bias in criminal investigations. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 7(3), 231–246.
Republic of Kazakhstan. (2014, July 4). Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Adilet.zan.kz.
Republic of Uzbekistan. (1994, September 22). Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Lex.uz. https://lex.uz/docs/-111460
Rossmo, D. K., & Pollock, J. M. (2019). Confirmation bias and other systemic causes of wrongful convictions: A sentinel events perspective. Northeastern University Law Review, 11(2), 790–835.
Ryabinina, T. K. (2010). Sudebnyy sledovatel – institut proshlogo ili nadezhda na budushchee? [Investigating judge – an institution of the past or hope for the future?]. In Ugolovnaya yustitsiya: Svyaz vremen [Criminal justice: Connecting the times] (Proceedings of the International Association for the Promotion of Justice).
Salet, R., & Terpstra, J. (2014). Critical review in criminal investigation: Evaluation of a measure to prevent tunnel vision. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 8(1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/pat039
Schünemann, B., & Bandilla, W. (1989). Perseverance in courtroom decisions. In H. Wegener, F. Lösel, & J. Haisch (Eds.), Criminal behavior and the justice system: Psychological perspectives (pp. 181–192). Springer.
Singelnstein, T. (2016). Confirmation Bias — Die Bestätigungsneigung als kognitive Verzerrung bei polizeilichen Ermittlungen im Strafverfahren. Criminal Defense Attorney, 36, 830–836.
Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan. (2026). 2025-yilda jinoyat ishlari boʻyicha sudlar faoliyati yakunlari toʻgʻrisida [On the results of the activities of criminal courts in 2025]. Press Service of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Tulaganova, G. Z. (2006). Dastlabki tergovda tortishuv [Adversarial proceedings in the preliminary investigation]. Lawyer, (4).
Zhamborov, M. S. (2013). Konstitutsionnyy printsip sostyazatelnosti kak sposob argumentirovannogo obosnovaniya prinyatiya pozitsii storony v rossiyskom sudoproizvodstve [The constitutional principle of adversarial proceedings as a method of reasoned justification for adopting a party’s position in Russian judicial proceedings]. Aktualnye problemy rossiyskogo prava, (4), 424–432.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 JURISPRUDENCE
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
