Legal psychologists have generally neglected intoxicated witnesses and suspects in their research. One possible reason is the lack of objective information about the prevalence and characteristics of this witness and suspect group. Also unclear is whether standard police procedures for dealing with intoxicated individuals exist and what these may be. The present survey was conducted to help fill this void. Law enforcement officers completed a survey about their experiences with intoxicated witnesses and suspects. Their responses provide clear evidence that dealing with intoxicated witnesses and suspects is common and that there are few standard procedures for handling such individuals. As our data strongly suggest that this group has a significant presence in law enforcement contexts, several research and policy questions are apparent. For example, if the intoxicated differ from sober witnesses and suspects, should this warrant uniquely tailored procedural recommendations? Findings from this survey are intended to spur and guide research aiming to provide useful guidelines to law enforcement on how to interact with this potentially vulnerable and underresearched group.

The aim of this study was to model various social and cognitive processes believed to be associated with true and false confessions by exploring the link between investigative biases and what occurs in the interrogation room. Using the Russano et al. (Psychol Sci 16:481-486, 2005) paradigm, this study explored how perceptions of guilt influenced the frequency and type of interrogation tactics used, suspect's perceptions of the interrogation process, the likelihood of confession, and investigator's resulting perceptions of culpability. Results suggested that investigator bias led to the increased use of minimization tactics and thereby increased the likelihood of false confessions by innocent participants. In contrast, the manipulation of investigator bias had no direct or indirect influence on guilty participants. These findings confirm the important role of investigator bias and improve our understanding of the decision-making process associated with true and false confessions.

Identifying interrogation strategies that minimize the likelihood of obtaining false information, without compromising the ability to elicit true information, is a challenge faced by both law enforcement and scientists. Previous research suggests that minimization and maximization techniques may be perceived by a suspect as an expectation of leniency and a threat of harsher punishment, respectively, and that these approaches may be associated with false confessions. The current studies examine whether it is possible to distinguish between minimization and maximization techniques that do or do not influence a suspect's perceptions of the consequences of confessing. Results indicate that techniques that manipulate the perceived consequences of confessing influence both the decision to confess and the diagnostic value of confession evidence.

The task force that led to the creation of the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) recommended that the HIG fund a program of research aimed at establishing scientifically supported interrogative best practices. One of the ways to identify 'best practices' is to rely on direct reporting from subject-matter experts. In this study, 42 highly experienced military and intelligence interrogators were interviewed about their interrogation-related practices and beliefs, including such topics as training and selection, the role of rapport, perceptions regarding the techniques employed, lie detection, and the roles of interpreters and analysts. Interrogators indicated that excellent interpersonal skills on the part of an interrogator, an emphasis on rapport and relationship-building techniques, and the assistance of well-prepared interpreters and analysts are key components of a successful interrogation. It is our hope that the results of this study will stimulate research, influence training models, and ultimately contribute toward an interrogative best-practice model.

The discovery of many cases of wrongful conviction in the criminal justice system involving admissions from innocent suspects has led psychologists to examine the factors contributing to false confessions. However, little systematic research has assessed the processes underlying Human Intelligence (HUMINT) interrogations relating to military and intelligence operations. The current article examines the similarities and differences between interrogations in criminal and HUMINT settings, and discusses the extent to which the current empirical literature can be applied to criminal and/or HUMINT interrogations. Finally, areas of future research are considered in light of the need for improving HUMINT interrogation.