How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.
- DOI
- 10.1037/lhb0000679
- Published
- 2026-09-21
- Container
- Law and Human Behavior
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association (APA)
- Open access
- unknown
Credibility signals
uncertain Score 64/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.
Show all credibility signals
- supportingDOI registered: A matching record was returned by Crossref.
- supportingDOI resolves: A matching record was returned by Crossref.
- not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility.
- not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored.
- supportingMetadata completeness: All 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present.
Cite this work
BibTeX
@article{allodium:10.1037/lhb0000679,
title = {How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.},
author = {Neil Brewer and Carmen A. Lucas and Katie Logos and Robyn L. Young and Alliyza Lim},
year = {2026},
journal = {Law and Human Behavior},
doi = {10.1037/lhb0000679},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000679}
}RIS
TY - JOUR TI - How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis. AU - Neil Brewer AU - Carmen A. Lucas AU - Katie Logos AU - Robyn L. Young AU - Alliyza Lim PY - 2026 JO - Law and Human Behavior DO - 10.1037/lhb0000679 UR - https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000679 ER -
APA
Brewer, N., Lucas, C. A., Logos, K., Young, R. L., & Lim, A. (2026). How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers’ evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.. Law and Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000679
Source records
- crossref · retrieved 2026-11-10T07:55:26.497Z