What is the effect of a Miranda warning on a suspect?

In explaining the basis for its decision, the court in Miranda held: "For those unaware of the [right to remain silent], the warning is needed simply to make them aware of it--the threshold requirement for an intelligent decision as to its exercise." (384 U.S. at p. 468, 86 S.Ct. at p. 1624.) Likewise, the warning that anything said can and will be used against the individual "is needed in order to make him aware not only of the [Fifth [949 P.2d 27] Amendment] privilege, but also of the consequences of forgoing it. It is only through an awareness of these consequences that there can be any assurance of real understanding and intelligent exercise of the privilege." (Id. at p. 469, 86 S.Ct. at p. 1625; see also Colorado v. Spring (1987) 479 U.S. 564, 574, 107 S.Ct. 851, 857, 93 L.Ed.2d 954 ["The Miranda warnings ensure that a waiver of [the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination] is knowing and intelligent by requiring that the suspect be fully advised of this constitutional privilege, including the critical advice that whatever he chooses to say may be used as evidence against him."].)