Proximity-based evidence disclosure: Providing an operational purpose for disclosing evidence in investigative interviews.

Abstract

Studying evidence disclosure methods in laboratory-based settings provides important contributions to evidence-based interview practices. However, methods developed through controlled testing need to be adapted to an operational context to ensure appropriate use in practice. The present project synthesized laboratory research on evidence disclosure and practical experience of homicide and robbery investigations to identify an operational purpose for disclosing evidence in investigative interviews. That purpose is to substantiate the reliability of the available evidence and thereby enhance the integrity of the investigation. To this end, we identified the concept of proximity as a strategic foundation to evidence disclosure. We developed a 2-day training program covering four modules (foundational interviewing, planning and preparation, investigative agenda, and resistance to evidence disclosure) and tested U.S. investigators’ interview performance by having them interview mock subjects before and after training. The findings show that the investigators became (a) accustomed to frame the evidence for disclosure and (b) less inclined to bluff and bait with evidence, make accusations, and ask leading questions, thereby (c) eliciting more statements that were reliably inconsistent to the available evidence while (d) reducing the contamination of admissions and statement-evidence inconsistencies. We attribute the adherence to the training to the fact that we specified an operational purpose for evidence disclosure, used proximity as a strategic concept, and integrated the disclosure strategy within the pursuit of a thorough investigation.

Interviewing young offenders about child-on-child sexual abuse

“…For example, Alison et al (2013) showed that rapport-building techniques were associated with positive interview outcomes, while Place and Meloy (2018) found that rapport strategies involving empathy best overcame interviewee resistance. More recent studies emphasize that supportive interviewing promotes rapport, cooperation, and informativeness on the part of adult suspects (e.g., Dianiska et al, 2021;Oleszkiewicz et al, 2023;Vallano et al, 2022). Interestingly, a concern with rapport throughout the interview is more effective than a focus on rapport-building only early in the interview (Baker-Eck & Bull, 2022).…”

“…Using the RSP, interviewers fostered greater responsiveness during the rapport-building phase, providing more details about a neutral event and sharing more information about themselves, suggesting that the children were more comfortable, trusting, and cooperative (Dianiska et al, 2021;Oleszkiewicz et al, 2023;Vallano et al, 2022). Similarly, the RP better promoted rapport during interviews with young suspected victims although interviewers tend to be more suspicious of young suspects than of alleged victims (Malloy & Lamb, 2010) and therefore rapport building with suspects is probably more challenging.…”