Developing an evidence-based perspective on interrogation: A review of the U.S. government’s high-value detainee interrogation group research program.

Abstract

Interrogation practices in the United States have been roundly criticized both for their accusatorial ethos, at times leading to false confessions by the innocent, and for a history of applying physical and psychological coercion in law enforcement, military, and intelligence contexts. Despite decades of psychological research demonstrating the failures of such approaches and despite recent positive advances in countries such as the United Kingdom moving to an information-gathering framework, little change has occurred in the training or practice of U.S. interrogation professionals over the past 50 years. This paper describes recent historical events that have led to the development of the first unclassified, government-funded research program on the science of interviewing and interrogation. Since 2010, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) Research Program has identified effective approaches for developing cooperation and rapport, eliciting information, challenging inconsistencies by presenting evidence or information strategically, and assessing credibility using cognitive cues and strategic questioning tactics. The program has also examined the influence of culture and language, and has facilitated the translation of research from the laboratory to the field. In this context, we review the significant contributions of psychologists to understanding and developing ethical, legal, and effective interrogation practices, and we describe important future directions for research on investigative interviewing and interrogation. DEVELOPING AN EVIDENCE-BASED PERSPECTIVE 3 Developing an Evidence-Based Perspective on Interrogation: A Review of the U.S. Government's High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group Research Program The interrogation practices adopted by law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals in the United States have been criticized both for their accusatorial ethos leading to false confessions and wrongful conviction of the innocent (Kassin et al., 2010; Lassiter & Meissner, 2010), as well as a dark history of applying torture in the interrogation booth (Costanzo & Redlich, 2010; Vrij et al., in press). Despite decades of research demonstrating the problems with such approaches and despite recent advances in countries such as the United Kingdom moving toward an information-gathering framework (Bull & Milne, 2004), little change has occurred in the training or practice of U.S. interrogation professionals over the past 50 years. This paper describes recent historical events that have led to the development of the first unclassified, government-funded research program on the science of interviewing and interrogation, and details its significant contributions to understanding and developing best practices. Notably, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) research program has been shaped, almost exclusively, by an international cadre of research psychologists conducting studies in the laboratory, in training academies, and in the field. As detailed below, the HIG research progr...

On the importance of a procedurally fair organizational climate for openness to change in law enforcement.

“…To test this, we included questions from Study 1 in a questionnaire that law enforcement interviewers completed at the end of evidence-based training on rapport and trust building techniques. Although a rapport-based approach to interviewing is highly encouraged by researchers (Meissner et al, 2017), practitioners have predominantly been trained in coercive techniques that are completely divergent in terms of ethos and tactical approach. Thus, we tested our model within the context of this novel interview training.…”

Source Handler perceptions of the interviewing processes employed with informants

“…For example, modified CIs, sketch plans (Dando et al, 2009;Eastwood et al, 2019), the timeline technique (Hope et al, 2013), and self-generated cues (Leins et al, 2014). Therefore, there are good grounds for the implementation of cognitive retrieval techniques into HUMINT practices (see Meissner et al, 2017), underpinned by the PEACE model approach.…”

“…Leins et al's (2014) study can extrapolate to such intelligence-gathering sessions where informants attend numerous meetings with organised crime groups (Fisher & Geiselman, 2019). Thus, the CI would benefit HUMINT scenarios, which concern interviewing for intelligence (alike investigative interviews; Meissner, Surmon-Böhr, Oleszkiewicz, & Alison, 2017).…”

Urgent issues and prospects in reforming interrogation practices in the United States and Canada

“…North America is no exception to this movementalthough accusatorial practices remain prevalent across the continent, aspects of the PEACE framework have become popular in Canada (Snook, Luther, Quinlan, & Milne, 2012), and leading interrogation training companies in the United States (e.g., Wicklander-Zulawski, John E. Reid & Associates) are now offering non-accusatorial suspect interviewing courses. A recent U.S. government research and training programme led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation has also begun to develop and assess science-based alternatives to customary practice (Brandon et al, 2019;Meissner et al, 2017). Although much progress has been made, I believe that two key research issues remain if we are to truly establish a viable alternative to customary practice.…”