「一個人為什麼會對其沒有作過的犯罪加以自白？特別是之後會導致一連串不利於己的後果，甚至是被判處死刑」，是近年來英美日等國學者所關注的問題。虛偽自白是許多因素交錯下的錯誤結果，本文彙整國外虛偽自白的相關研究，歸納出虛偽自白的形成與（一）偵訊情境，（二）偵訊技術，（三）偵查偏誤，（四）個人脆弱性等四個層面有關；本文並且分析虛偽自白形成的環節，包括：（一）某些單位組織文化，過度重視破案立即性及必要性，容許便宜行事的偵訊手段和強制偵訊技術，且過度依賴自白作為證據；（二）偵查人員在組織壓力及個人因素的影響下，受到不正確資訊和個人主觀判斷影響形成偵查偏見，忽略與其假設不符合的其他資訊，轉而強化及扭曲解釋與其假設符合的資訊；（三）偵查偏誤所產生的有罪判斷，導致偵查人員傾向使用更具強制及重覆性的偵訊技術，促使否認犯行的犯罪嫌疑人作出更防衛的行為表現，此舉更強化偵查人員有罪判斷的確定；（四）具有某些個人因素（脆弱性）的嫌疑人，在面對偵訊情境壓力及某些心理操弄的偵訊策略時，容易放棄法律權利（例如緘默權及律師在場權），作出虛偽自白；（五）偵訊過程中，偵查人員沒有能力判斷供述的真實性。最後，本文提出評估與解釋虛偽自白的參考架構，並對偵訊過程中預防虛偽自白作出建議。

The phenomenon of false confession has received great deal of attention from the law and the scientific community over the past decade. This article reviews what appears to be associated with the elicitation of false confessions, including situational factors, interrogation tactics, investigative bias, and psychological vulnerabilities of the suspect .This article also suggests that a sequence of five processes is responsible for false confessions. Firstly, some organizations overly rely on confession evidence to solve the crime, and encourage investigators to obtain confession by confrontational interrogation. Secondly, investigators commit investigative bias, overemphasizing on ”hits” (corroborations of one's pet hypothesis) and underemphasizing on ”misses” (failures to corroborate one's pet hypothesis). Thirdly, the investigative bias may lead to pressure-filled, guilt-presumptive interrogations that make innocent suspects more defensive, eliciting more highly confrontational interrogations. Forthly, under some situational risk factors and psychologically manipulative interrogation techniques, suspects with psychological vulnerabilities are susceptible to waiving their rights and providing false confessions. Fifthly, investigators cannot distinguish between uncorroborated true and false confessions. Finally, suggestions are proposed for the prevention of false confessions.