Accusatorial and information-gathering interview and interrogation methods: a multi-country comparison

Miller, Jeaneé C.; Redlich, Allison D.; Kelly, Christopher E.

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2018.1467909

Cited by 39 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…What sets techniques apart, then, and justifies their discussion as a distinct cluster of methods is that we know interviewers and interrogators, especially in the USA, have more tools from which to choose whilst attempting to elicit information from uncooperative interviewees that are conceptually distinct from question types (Miller et al, 2018). As such, we can identify techniques as being verbal if not exclusively lingual; they can be the physical actions or simply the presence of more than just an interviewer and suspect; they can be embodied in inanimate objects or the space in which the interview is conducted (Dawson et al, 2015); and techniques are often—by design—undetectable by the suspect or an untrained observer.…”

Section: You Ask and Do Not Receive Because You Ask Wronglymentioning

confidence: 99%

You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly

Kelly

Valencia

2020

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigative interviewing can be thought of as the interaction between two clusters of factors: questions and techniques. Analyses of question types and interview techniques are often treated discretely, where one is the focal point at the expense of the other, or they are conceptually indistinguishable. To explore these relationships further, the current study examined a sample of interviews using the Griffiths Question Map and a taxonomy of interview methods. In addition to presenting maps as example interviews, the article explores the associations between interview clusters and suspect cooperation. Results indicate that greater use of appropriate questions was associated with greater use of rapport-building techniques and greater suspect cooperation, and a reduction in the use of accusatorial interrogation tactics, which themselves were associated with suspect resistance. Implications for research and practice include understanding the interaction between these—and potentially other—clusters.

show abstract

Section: You Ask and Do Not Receive Because You Ask Wronglymentioning

confidence: 99%

You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly

Kelly

Valencia

2020

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, for the purposes of an initial examination of cooperation in witness interviews, the alliances between and contributions of diverse police forces were of outmost significance. In addition, previous research has demonstrated similarities in investigative practices and interviewing traditions across countries (Kelly et al, 2013;Miller et al, 2018), extending the generalisability of the findings. Similar to previous research, the present analysis of the effectiveness of current practice is based on scientific evidence from psychological research, more specifically, from applied memory research, which also broadens the interpretation and implications of the findings to more general aspects of human cognition and behaviour (e.g., Vrij et al, 2014).…”

Section: Methodological Considerationssupporting

confidence: 66%

“…Based on our preliminary findings, the observed pattern of the sampled Dutch interviews seems to be more akin to the pattern of interviewing followed by the police in North America rather than in Europe. Traditionally, the interviewing models in these regions fall into the dichotomous categories of accusatorial and information gathering respectively (Miller et al, 2018). Considering that an information-gathering approach to interviewing witnesses is informed by scientific research and its effectiveness is supported by evidence (Fisher, 2010;Fisher et al, 2011;Hope & Gabbert, 2019;Vrij et al, 2014), we adhere to the call for the adoption of an investigative interviewing approach as the standard in Dutch investigative practices (Boon et al, 2016).…”

Section: Leading Questions and Statementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A broken tandem

Vilar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.

show abstract

“…We gathered responses from current detainees because they are the most representative of the ‘target’ individual during investigative interviews [ 14 ]. While majority of the research on interview strategies have relied on police investigator’s data [ 15 – 17 ] few studies have examined detainees’ perspectives (see 9 , 14 , for exceptions). Gathering information from the target population is essential, as cooperation is ultimately the suspect’s decision, researchers must then also examine what suspects think of the interview to obtain a more complete picture of what occurs in the interview room [ 14 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detainee and layperson’s expectations and preferences regarding police interview rooms

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emerging research on how suspects perceive the physical environment during investigative interviews yields contrasting findings. While previous studies have suggested that a room made to be physically comfortable may be optimal for interviewing suspects, another study found it can instead lead to higher suspicion of the investigator’s intentions. The current study examined current detainees’ and general population participants’ beliefs about a room that resembled a “typical” interview room, and one decorated to be warm, inviting, and comfortable. Participants also provided descriptive information about their perceptions of police interview environments (e.g., preferences, expectations). We hypothesized that the decorated room would elicit higher ratings of suspicion and wariness compared to the “typical” room. Our findings showed that, overall, participants expected to be interviewed in the “typical” room but preferred the decorated one. Contrary to our expectations, they rated the “typical” room higher on feelings of suspicion than the decorated room. The decorated room also corresponded with what participants reported to be an environment that promotes disclosure. These results bode well for conducting investigative interviews in comfortable environments.

show abstract

Accusatorial and information-gathering interview and interrogation methods: a multi-country comparison

Cited by 39 publications

References 41 publications

You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly

You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly

A broken tandem

Detainee and layperson’s expectations and preferences regarding police interview rooms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About