Investigative interviewing of high‐status fraud suspects

Hoekstra, Manon R.; Verhoeven, Willem-Jan

doi:10.1002/jip.1579

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The other dissociation styles (Dissociation-2 and -3 in Figure 1) appeared twice, respectively. All the invocations of Dissociation-2 comprised authors pitching a broad definition, suggesting it encapsulates any conceivable status quo of rapport's meaning Hoekstra & Verhoeven, 2021).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Rapport Seems Challenging to Define and What to do About the Challenge

Neequaye¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores why rapport seems challenging to define in the investigative interviewing literature. To demonstrate this issue is contemporary, I examined the most recent publications on rapport (August 2021 - January 2023; N = 19). Approximately 50% of the articles did not define rapport or posited multiple definitions, making a definitional preference impossible to detect. The 50% that specified a focal or single definition came with some form of suggestion that they were real definitions—the objective definitions of rapport. But all those definitions were different, highlighting the ambiguity of rapport in the literature. I discuss how a pragmatic approach via nominal definition can assist in flagging a single sense to use the word rapport, thereby eliminating ambiguity and limitations in assessing construct validity.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Rapport Seems Challenging to Define and What to do About the Challenge

Neequaye¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the present study sought to examine suspects' perspectives about denials of guilt and the interrogation process by administering a self‐reported survey focusing on the crimes of theft and fraud, which have largely not been considered in studies conducted at the national and international levels, although a few studies have examined fraud suspects (e.g. Hoekstra & Verhoeven, 2021; Kim et al., 2018; Walsh & Bull, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bull & Soukara, 2010; Cleary & Bull, 2019), although some have focused on fraud suspects (e.g. Hoekstra & Verhoeven, 2021; Walsh & Bull, 2012). Second, theft accounts for a great many criminal offences in Japan, which results in a large number of suspects being interrogated for theft.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prisoners' reasons for denial of guilt for their alleged crimes during interrogation and factors related to their denial

Wachi,

Yokota,

Otsuka

et al. 2023

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated predictive factors of prisoners' denial of guilt for their alleged crimes during interrogation. We administered a self‐reported questionnaire to new male prisoners who were convicted of theft and/or fraud and had denied the crime during interrogation. First, we analysed the reasons for their denial and identified factors of Anxiety and Refusal. Next, we investigated which interrogator's behaviour the prisoners believed had influenced their denial and identified three factors: Persuasion, Non‐Presentation of Evidence, and Confrontation. Finally, we examined whether the prisoners' denial at the conclusion of interrogation would be predicted by these factors, specifically in terms of the prisoners' reasons for denial, the interrogator's behaviour and the characteristics of the prisoners and their crimes. The results revealed that marital status, and Anxiety and Non‐Presentation of Evidence were predictive of denial at the conclusion of interrogation. Interrogators need to consider these factors when interviewing denying suspects.

show abstract

The resister, the talker and the confessor: A closer look at suspect responses in investigative interviews

Kelly,

Jenaway,

Kyong‐McClain

et al. 2024

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on investigative interviewing tends to focus on a limited number of interview methods employed during an interview in pursuit of a singular outcome. The present study took an expansive view of the techniques used, questions asked and interviewer disposition, and related them to three interview goals—overcoming resistance, gathering information and eliciting confessions. Drawing upon theory and prior research, we hypothesised that certain methods would be more relevant to certain outcomes than others, such as question types would have a greater effect on information gain than techniques or interviewer disposition. Using a sample of 43 suspect interviews provided by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD), we found partial support for our hypotheses. Rapport‐based approaches and a respectful disposition reduced resistance, open‐ended questions elicited more information than closed‐ended ones and in the final model, only open‐ended questions increased confessions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

Investigative interviewing of high‐status fraud suspects

Cited by 5 publications

References 71 publications

Why Rapport Seems Challenging to Define and What to do About the Challenge

Why Rapport Seems Challenging to Define and What to do About the Challenge

Prisoners' reasons for denial of guilt for their alleged crimes during interrogation and factors related to their denial

The resister, the talker and the confessor: A closer look at suspect responses in investigative interviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About