Using the Hare SRP-III to measure participants’ embodiment of psychopathic tendencies, this study examines the different strategies used by interrogators and suspects as a function of psychopathy, as it exists on a spectrum. Specifically, this study will focus on participants’ self-report measures of pathological lying, cunning/manipulativeness, and lack of remorse or guilt. These aspects of the Hare SRP-III were selected because of their likelihood to affect behavior in an interrogation setting. 
	Higher scores on these factors will advantage both the interrogator and the suspect by affecting which strategies each chooses to employ. For instance, a suspect who scores highly on measures of pathological lying and cunning may be better able to avoid difficult questions and maintain an air of innocence with less effort than one who scores lower. Likewise, interrogators reporting higher manipulativeness and a lack of remorse or guilt may be more willing to cross more social boundaries than lower scoring colleagues. 
	One hundred participants recruited from a diverse, urban community will be randomly assigned to play the role of a suspect or an interrogator. Those randomly assigned to be a suspect will be further randomly assigned to either the truthful or deceptive condition. 

Fifty community members will act as mock suspects, each receiving monetary compensation for their participation.  The participants will be randomly assigned to one of the Veracity conditions: Truthful or Deceptive. 
	All suspect participants will receive instructions to go to a nearby bookstore to retrieve a specific book. This particular book will supposedly be in a box, buried under miscellaneous distractor items. On top of that box will be a briefcase with a wallet inside. Participants in the Deceptive condition will be instructed to steal the wallet from the briefcase. The participants in the Truthful condition, though not instructed to open the briefcase or take the wallet, will have to move the briefcase out of the way to get to the specified book, supposedly at the bottom of the box—though, in reality, no such book will be there. 
	Upon returning from the bookstore, mock suspects will receive instructions about the impending interrogation. Specifically, they will receive information that they are suspected of stealing a wallet containing a large sum of money from the bookstore and there was evidence implying their guilt. Next, suspects will be informed that they are to be interrogated, and their task is to be as convincingly innocent as possible. Additional monetary compensation will be offered if they are able to convince the interrogator they had not committed the theft.
	Suspects will also be handed a letter that supposedly came from their lawyer: 

I have received information that you are to be interrogated concerning a theft of a wallet. My job as a lawyer is to provide the best defense possible for you, regardless of whether you are guilty or not. To my understanding, the suspicions concern the theft of a wallet in [the name of the book store]. There is probably some indication that you possibly could be guilty of this crime; if there wasn’t you would not be a suspect. Exactly what this indication is I don’t know, but I would guess you will find out during the interrogation. Unfortunately I can not be present at the interrogation, but I have one piece of advice to give you: remember that the police probably have some indication that you might be guilty (this indication can be very weak or strong). 
