Objectives <p>We tested the behavioral effects of theoretically coercive plea negotiation scenarios on mock defendant decision-making and perceptions using a novel paradigm.</p> Methods <p>We conducted an experimental plea negotiation study to address how the theoretically coercive elements of constraints, conditional offers, and conditional threats impact plea decision-making of guilty and innocent defendants. Community member participants (<i>N</i> = 316) acted as mock defendants and negotiated a plea deal with trained confederate prosecutors and defense attorneys.</p> Results <p>We found that conditional offers and guilt status significantly increased plea acceptance. Guilty participants were over 16 times more likely to accept a plea than innocent ones. Notably, 32.9% of innocent participants accepted a plea when a conditional offer was present, compared to 5.0% when absent.</p> Conclusions <p>This research advances our understanding of which plea tactics and elements may place innocent defendants at the greatest risk for involuntary and false guilty pleas.</p>