Within the discipline of sociology human olfaction is rich with social significance yet remains a poorly charted frontier. Therefore, the following discourse is aimed toward the development of a foundation for the sociological study of olfaction. It is formed by the dual goals of unearthing the social history of olfaction and of providing a viable sociological account of the manner in which smells affect human ontology. From these goals arise the following research questions: (1) Have the meaning and social relevance of odors and the olfactory sensorium changed throughout different periods of history?; (2) How have those in the lineage of eminent sociological thinkers addressed the phenomenon of human olfaction during these periods?; and (3) What is the process by which aromatic stimuli are transformed from simple chemical compounds, drifting in the atmosphere, into sensations in a sensory field and then on to perceived objects, to subjects of judgment and interpretation, and finally to bases of knowledge which form and continually reform individuals in the world? The weaving of the sociohistorical tapestry of smell is undertaken to provide examples from thousands of years lived experiences as to the fluid and sociologically complex nature of individuals' olfactory senses. This historical information is presented in a narrative format and is synthesized from data gleaned from books, advertisements, articles in popular non-scientific magazines, as well as from the findings of studies published in medical/neurological, psychological, anthropological, and sociological scholarly journals. Regarding theoretical aim of this discourse, insights are drawn from Maurice Merleau-Ponty's phenomenological theory of human perception for the generation of a framework for the sociological study of olfaction. Merleau-Ponty's theoretical notions are modified, modernized, and refitted to more specifically fit the subject of human olfaction and to include all that has been discovered about the biological specifics of olfactory perception since the time of his writing. Taken in sum, this effort is an access point to the understanding of how olfactory sensory perceptions flow toward the ontological unfolding of individuals.

Miranda abilities, individual characteristics, and contextual factors are critical elements to evaluate in determining the validity of Miranda rights waivers and confessions. Research indicates that many individuals waive their Miranda rights without adequate comprehension or reasoning. In addition, personality characteristics of suggestibility and compliance are key factors influencing waiver decisions. Furthermore, scholars found that situational anxiety likewise impairs Miranda abilities and waiver decisions. Previous research has investigated the effects of Miranda abilities, individual characteristics, and contextual factors on Miranda waivers and confessions by utilizing confession paradigms. A methodological limitation of these paradigms is the lack of volition and autonomy in committing the accused acts of wrongdoings. The current study of undergraduate students advances previous research through examining the detrimental impact of false accusations of wrongdoings committed independently and intentionally using a novel paradigm. This thesis sought to further the understanding of the effects of Miranda abilities (i.e., comprehension and reasoning), personality characteristics (i.e., suggestibility and compliance), and situational factors (i.e., false accusation) in relation to Miranda waivers and confession decisions. The final sample included 87 undergraduate students, of whom approximately 97% waived their rights and 40% falsely confessed to the wrongdoing. The results indicate that Miranda reasoning, suggestibility, and compliance significantly predict the likelihood of false confession. These findings can be used to inform policy changes as well as the evaluations of the validity of Miranda waivers and confessions.

In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court of the United States required that custodial arrestees be informed of their constitutional and continuous rights to silence and to legal counsel. Moreover, the ruling mandated that waivers be considered valid only if they were made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. However, in the decades that followed, evidence from both caselaw and empirical scholarship clarified that, for many vulnerable populations, these rights are in jeopardy. Among these vulnerable populations, those with limited cognitive capacities (LCCs) have been functionally excluded from research which primarily focused on persons with intellectual disabilities. This thesis offers a novel exploration of the role of specific cognitive impairments on Miranda comprehension and reasoning, with a focus on verbal intelligence (VIQ). Using a large archival sample of pretrial defendants (N = 820), current results suggest that defendants struggled with Miranda abilities regardless of other, individual characteristics. However, verbal intelligence emerged as a very strong predictor of Miranda comprehension such that those with lower VIQ were considerably more vulnerable to impaired comprehension. More so, data suggest that several compounded vulnerabilities (i.e., minoritized racial/ethnic identity status, limited academic achievement, illiteracy) are essential to understanding the extent of vulnerability in the criminal legal system in addition to the negative impacts of cognitive impairments. Several crucial implications for clinical practice and legal decision-making are explored. Finally, essential areas for future research are presented.

Over the last several decades, researchers have documented how impaired reasoning by adult offenders impeded the intelligent waiver of Miranda rights. Logically, it stands to reason that juveniles – who are developmentally less mature and have less life experience than their adult counterparts – would possess even greater impairment, thereby heightening their risk for invalid Miranda waivers. Juvenile Miranda research supports this notion; with some researchers finding that psychosocial maturity, among other factors, affect a juvenile’s understanding of their rights. Yet, relatively few studies have examined its relation to Miranda reasoning and decision-making. Thus, the current study investigated the specific role of maturity in juveniles’ Miranda comprehension and reasoning. Participants included 236 legally-involved juveniles recruited from either a juvenile detention center or a juvenile justice alternative education program. The effects of psychosocial maturity were examined on a variety of Miranda-related measures and assessed a broad range of Miranda abilities. It was found that, in general, immature juveniles performed more poorly on all Miranda measures as compared to their mature counterparts. However, the impact of maturity varied considerably depending on the ability. Specifically, maturity was most important in the context of Miranda reasoning. As a novel addition to the literature, the current study also investigated the effects of developmental timing on maturity (i.e., immaturity-delayed versus immaturity-expected) on Miranda abilities.