Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations 2--Interviewee Version

Duke, Misty C.; Wood, James M.; Bollin, Brock; Scullin, Matthew H.; LaBianca, Julia

doi:10.1037/t66046-000

Cited by 3 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CFA is a statistical procedure that evaluates whether observed data fit statistical measurement models (Thompson, 2004). The CFA was conducted on the 30 rapport-related items comprising the five facets of rapport reported by Duke (2013), using robust maximum-likelihood analysis. The three items comprising the Commitment to Communication scale were excluded from the analysis, as this scale is not intended to measure rapport, but rather the intended effect of rapport.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All interviewee participants rated their experience on 33 items that had been identified in a previous study by Duke (2013). In that study, Duke first conducted a search of the theoretical and empirical literature on rapport (e.g., Abbe & Brandon, 2013, 2014; Bordin, 1979; Driskell & Driskell, 2011; Strong, 1968; Tickle-Degnen & Rosenthal, 1990), investigative and intelligence interviewing (e.g., Intelligence Science Board, 2006; Kleinman, 2006; National Defense Intelligence College, 2008; Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2009; Soufan, 2011), and interpersonal influence (e.g., Cialdini, 1993; Petty & Cacioppo, 1981).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The five-factor structure of rapport reported by Duke (2013) was based on ratings made by individuals who observed videotapes of simulated investigative interviews. Study 1 of the present article was intended to determine whether this same factor structure would be found if the same items were self-rated by interviewees.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This scenario was intended to simulate some investigative interviews in which the interviewee is generally cooperative but motivated to withhold some information. When the interview ended, the interviewee completed the 33 items identified by Duke (2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The methods used in this study (factor analysis, item analysis, construct validity analyses using convergent and discriminant validity coefficients, and concurrent validity analyses using nontest criteria) are based on well-accepted methods of scale construction that are routinely applied in the fields of personality, health psychology, and clinical assessment (Clark & Watson, 1995; Garb, Wood, & Fiedler, 2011; Goldberg, 1972; Burisch, 1984). In a previous study, Duke (2013) identified a pool of items that appeared to represent five facets of rapport. In Study 1 of the present article, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of these items was used to construct factor scales reflecting these five facets of rapport, plus a sixth scale representing the hypothesized effects of rapport.…”

Section: Overview Of the Research Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Development of the Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations (RS3i), Interviewee Version.

Duke¹,

Wood²,

Bollin³

et al. 2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes the development and psychometric properties of the Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations, Interviewee Version (RS3i), a multidimensional self-report questionnaire intended to measure interviewees' experience of rapport in forensic and intelligence interviews. Two studies are described. In Study 1, 80 simulated investigative interviews were conducted regarding a supposed case of domestic terrorism. Afterward, the 80 interviewee participants rated the interviews on rapport-related questionnaire items. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of these ratings was used to construct a 21-item measure, the RS3i, comprising 5 Rapport Scales (Attentiveness, Trust/Respect, Expertise, Cultural Similarity, and Connected Flow) and a sixth scale, Commitment to Communication, that assesses an interviewee's motivation to be cooperative. In Study 2, another 94 simulated investigative interviews were conducted, after which interviewee participants rated the interview using the RS3i. A CFA of the Study 2 data confirmed the factor structure identified in Study 1. Good internal reliability and construct validity were demonstrated for most RS3i scales. Furthermore, scores on several scales were found to be higher when interviewers used rapport-based tactics and to correlate with the amount of information disclosed by interviewees during questioning. The RS3i can be a useful, psychometrically sound tool for use in rapport research and the training of forensic and intelligence interviewers.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of the Research Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Development of the Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations (RS3i), Interviewee Version.

Duke¹,

Wood²,

Bollin³

et al. 2018

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social Judgments of Rapport in Investigative Interviews Across Cultures

Wilson¹,

Matsumoto

Vasquez³

et al. 2022

Cross-Cultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapport is a fundamental psychological construct and understanding it conceptually, including how it is perceived in social interactions, may have a crucial impact on human relations. Culture may be a key that can disentangle and elucidate dynamic characteristics about the nature of rapport as culture provides different and unique meaning systems. We examined cultural similarities and differences in social perceptions of rapport in a context in which interactants had different cultural/ethnic backgrounds. Observers from three very different culture/language groups rated their perceptions about the quality of rapport along 11 conceptually theorized rapport dimensions in video clips presenting one-on-one interviews that differed in their rapport levels. The observer ratings reduced to the same two dimensions across all observer groups, Positivity and Negativity, and there were considerable cultural similarities, along with some differences, in perceptions of rapport across videos. We discussed these findings concerning future theory and research on rapport in various contexts.

show abstract

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

Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations 2--Interviewee Version

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Development of the Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations (RS3i), Interviewee Version.

Development of the Rapport Scales for Investigative Interviews and Interrogations (RS3i), Interviewee Version.

Social Judgments of Rapport in Investigative Interviews Across Cultures

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About