3 Communication Errors

Introduction

In the realm of investigative interviewing, myths and misconceptions abound. These myths, often perpetuated by popular culture and media, can lead to ineffective interviewing techniques, misinterpretations, and even miscarriages of justice. As the field of investigative interviewing evolves, it is crucial to dispel these myths and replace them with practices grounded in scientific research.

This report aims to debunk seven common myths about investigative interviewing. From the Hollywood-fueled 'good cop, bad cop' routine to the belief that stress behaviors are clear indicators of guilt, these myths are deeply ingrained in our collective consciousness. However, they are not supported by empirical evidence and can hinder the effectiveness of investigators during the course of their investigations.

We will take each myth one at a time providing a clear explanation of why it is a misconception and offering a science-based perspective in its place. The goal is to provide a more accurate understanding of investigative interviewing, showing what is actually science, grounded in the latest research and best practices in the field.

By debunking these myths, we hope to enhance the quality of investigative interviewing, leading to more accurate and reliable information, fairer outcomes, and ultimately, a more just society. Let's embark on this journey of unmasking the truth, one myth at a time.

Myth #1 - Good Cop, Bad Cop is the Gold Standard

The 'good cop, bad cop' strategy, often glamorized in popular culture, is a common myth in the realm of investigative interviewing. Sometimes referred to as the 'Mutt and Jeff' routine, this interrogation technique involves one interviewer adopting an aggressive stance, while the other takes on a more sympathetic role. This creates an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. However, research has consistently shown that this approach is far from effective.

In a study by Alison, Alison, Noone, Elntib, and Christiansen (2013), it was found that a non-confrontational approach, characterized by empathy, respect, and active listening, was more effective in eliciting truthful information. This approach, known as the Observing Rapport-Based Interpersonal Techniques (ORBIT), focuses on building rapport with the interviewee, which encourages them to share more openly and honestly.

In contrast, the 'good cop, bad cop' strategy can create a hostile environment that inhibits open communication. The fear and intimidation induced by this approach can lead to more resistance, reduced rapport, and increased deception, rather than cooperation and truth-telling. Furthermore, this strategy can also lead to ethical concerns. The aggressive tactics used by the 'bad cop' can border on coercion, which is not only unethical but can also lead to false confessions and wrongful convictions.

In the end, the 'good cop, bad cop' strategy is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing emphasizes the importance of empathy, respect, and active listening, which are key to building rapport and eliciting truthful information. The most effective interviewers and interrogators avoid this so-called "trick of the trade."

Myth #2 - Lie Detection is a Walk in the Park

The belief that deception can be easily detected through non-verbal cues or inconsistencies in a person's story is a pervasive myth in investigative interviewing. Many people believe that liars exhibit certain 'tells', such as avoiding eye contact, fidgeting, or stuttering. However, research has consistently shown that these cues are not reliable indicators of deception.

In a meta-analysis by DePaulo, Lindsay, Malone, Muhlenbruck, Charlton, and Cooper (2003), it was found that humans are generally poor at detecting deception. The study revealed that people are only slightly better than chance at distinguishing between truth and lies, with an average accuracy rate of just 54%. Furthermore, the study found that even trained professionals, such as police officers and judges, are not significantly better at detecting deception than the general public. This suggests that the ability to detect deception is not simply a matter of training or experience.

Instead of relying on supposed 'tells', a science-based approach to interviewing focuses on gathering detailed, verifiable information. This involves asking open-ended questions that encourage the interviewee to provide extensive and detailed responses, which can then be corroborated with other evidence.

In conclusion, the belief that deception can be easily detected is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing emphasizes the importance of gathering detailed, verifiable information, rather than relying on unreliable deception cues.

Myth #3 - Memory is a Perfect Recorder

Another common myth in investigative interviewing is the belief that human memory works like a video recorder, accurately capturing events as they happen. This belief can lead to the assumption that any inconsistencies in a person's account are indicative of deception.

However, research has shown that human memory is far from perfect. Memory is malleable and can be influenced by various factors, including the passage of time, stress, and suggestive questioning. For example, studies have shown that eyewitnesses can be led to remember false details of an event through suggestive questioning, a phenomenon known as the misinformation effect (Loftus, 2005).

Furthermore, research has shown that memory recall is not a passive process of retrieving stored information. Instead, it is an active process of reconstruction, where memories are pieced together from various sources of information. This means that memories can be influenced by a person's beliefs, expectations, and even their current emotional state (Schacter, 1999).

Given the complexities of human memory, a science-based approach to interviewing emphasizes the importance of using techniques that minimize memory contamination. One such technique is the Cognitive Interview, which encourages a free recall of events and reduces leading questions (Fisher & Geiselman, 1992).

In conclusion, the belief that memory is a perfect recorder is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing recognizes the complexities of human memory and emphasizes the importance of using techniques that minimize memory contamination.

"[Science-Based Interviewing] was probably the best class I have been to in my 10 years of military/LEO career. Very well taught.

Police Officer, Kansas

Myth #4 - Quantity Over Quality in Questioning

The notion that asking more questions leads to more information is a common myth in investigative interviewing. The belief is that by bombarding an interviewee with questions, the interviewer can extract more information and uncover the truth.

However, research has shown that this approach can be counterproductive. Asking too many questions can overwhelm an interviewee, reduce rapport, and lead to less accurate information. Furthermore, it can create an adversarial atmosphere that inhibits open communication.

Instead, a science-based approach to interviewing emphasizes the importance of allowing the interviewee to speak freely. This involves asking open-ended questions that encourage the interviewee to provide detailed responses. Research has shown that this approach yields more accurate and comprehensive information (Memon, Meissner, & Fraser, 2010).

Furthermore, this approach allows the interviewer to build rapport with the interviewee, which can encourage more open and honest communication. It also allows the interviewer to observe the interviewee's non-verbal cues, which can provide additional insights into their state of mind and the veracity of their statements.

In conclusion, the belief that asking more questions leads to more information is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing emphasizes the importance of asking open-ended questions and allowing the interviewee to speak freely.

Myth #5 - Confessions are Gospel Truth

The belief that individuals would not confess to a crime they did not commit is a deeply ingrained myth in investigative interviewing. This belief can lead to an over-reliance on confessions in criminal investigations and trials, despite the fact that false confessions are a well-documented phenomenon.

Research has shown that false confessions can occur for various reasons, including coercive interviewing techniques, psychological vulnerabilities, and cognitive biases (Kassin et al., 2010). For example, individuals may confess to a crime they did not commit under the pressure of a prolonged interrogation, out of a desire to please authority figures, or because they have come to believe, through suggestive questioning, that they are guilty.

Given the potential for false confessions, a science-based approach to interviewing emphasizes the importance of corroborating confessions with other evidence. This involves checking the details of the confession against the known facts of the case and seeking independent evidence that can either support or refute the confession.

Moreover, this approach emphasizes the importance of avoiding coercive interviewing techniques that can lead to false confessions. This includes techniques such as the Reid technique, which involves the use of psychological manipulation and has been criticized for its potential to induce false confessions (Leo, 2008).

Finally, the belief that confessions are always truthful is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing recognizes the potential for false confessions and emphasizes the importance of corroborating confessions with other evidence and avoiding coercive interviewing techniques.

Myth #6 - Stress Equals Guilt

It's a common misconception in investigative interviewing that stress behaviors, such as fidgeting or avoiding eye contact, are clear indicators of guilt. This belief can lead to a bias in the interpretation of these behaviors, with innocent individuals being wrongly perceived as guilty.

However, research has shown that these behaviors are not reliable indicators of deception. Stress can be triggered by various factors, including the stress of the interview itself, fear of not being believed, or anxiety about the potential consequences of the investigation (Vrij, 2008).

Equally important, research has shown that individuals vary widely in their stress responses, with some individuals showing little to no visible signs of stress even in highly stressful situations. This means that the absence of stress behaviors does not necessarily indicate truthfulness.

A science-based approach to interviewing recognizes these complexities and emphasizes the importance of focusing on the content of the interviewee's statements, rather than their stress behaviors. This involves asking open-ended questions that encourage the interviewee to provide detailed responses, which can then be corroborated with other evidence.

In conclusion, the belief that stress equals guilt is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing recognizes that stress reactions are not reliable indicators of guilt and emphasizes the importance of focusing on the content of the interviewee's statements.

Myth #7 - The Truth is a Sprint, Not a Marathon

The belief that the truth will emerge quickly during an interview is a common myth in investigative interviewing. This belief can lead to a rush to judgment, with interviewers prematurely concluding the investigation based on incomplete or inaccurate information.

However, research has shown that people may withhold information for various reasons, such as fear, embarrassment, or a desire to protect others. This means that the truth may not emerge immediately, but rather over the course of several interviews (Snook et al., 2010).

A science-based approach to interviewing recognizes this complexity and emphasizes the importance of patience and persistence. This involves building rapport with the interviewee over time, which can encourage them to share more openly and honestly. It also involves corroborating the interviewee's statements with other evidence, to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information obtained.

Overall it may be said the belief that the truth will emerge quickly is a myth that is not supported by empirical evidence. A science-based approach to investigative interviewing emphasizes the importance of patience, persistence, and corroboration, which are key to uncovering the truth.

References

Alison, L. J., Alison, E., Noone, G., Elntib, S., & Christiansen, P. (2013). Why tough tactics fail and rapport gets results: Observing Rapport-Based Interpersonal Techniques (ORBIT) to generate useful information from terrorists. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law: An Official Law Review of the University of Arizona College of Law and the University of Miami School of Law, 19(4), 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034564

DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74

Fisher, R. P. & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions: risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34(1), 3–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-009-9188-6

Memon, A., Meissner, C. A., & Fraser, J. (2010). The Cognitive Interview: A meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law: An Official Law Review of the University of Arizona College of Law and the University of Miami School of Law, 16(4), 340–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020518

Snook, B., Eastwood, J., Stinson, M., Tedeschini, J., & House, J. C. (2010). Reforming investigative interviewing in Canada. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 52(2), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.52.2.215

Vrij, A. (2011). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.