Samenvatting
Interrogation and Interviewing, problem 2, complete summary
- Vak
- Instelling
Interrogation and Interviewing, problem 2, complete summary of the master Legal Psychology at Maastricht University. Passed the course with an 8.0
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 24 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 24 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
Verkoper
Volgen
bloempje99
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary problem 2:1. Different types of interrogation interviews exist?
Macro & Meso level classification. Explain the model by Kelly et al. (2013)
Kelly et al. (2013)- A taxonomy (=classification) of interrogation methods
Taxonomy organizes what is known about a phenomenon in such a fashion that is accessible and
sensible to consumers of the information. It systematizes established observations that are heuristic
in nature for the researcher, and can assist in the decision making process for the interviewer.
“In practice, interviewers use multiple techniques, and each technique is able to influence the other,
thus the diagnosticity of a technique used can be different if more are used compared to one alone.
The domains, which are part of a bigger taxonomy together with the interactive process model help
to get insight in the dynamic structure of the interviewer and the interviewee”
3 level structure
- Macro: research on interrogation, suspect interviewing, and intelligence collection focuses on
broad categories of their methods (e.g. information gathering vs. accusatorial approach;
minimization vs. maximization; friendly vs. harsh; rapport- vs. control-based)
Meaningful in advancing the understanding of interrogation and interviewing in most
generic of terms
But: not meaningful enough to fully describe the dynamic between interrogator and subject
- Micro: research on interrogation, suspect interviewing, and intelligence collection focuses on
very specific techniques (e.g. using open-ended questions, appealing to the source’s conscience;
touch suspect in friendly manner, yelling, appeal to religion)
Meaningful in helping identify precise tactics that are better able to produce accurate &
reliable confessions, or generate human intelligence.
But: these may be too detailed to understand and research the process of interrogation
- Meso: identified 71 recognized unique interrogation techniques based on a comprehensive
literature review and sorted them into 6 domains, based on their underlying conceptual goals &
face validity:
Rapport and
Relationship Building
Context Manipulation
Emotion Provocation
Collaboration
Confrontation/
Competition
Presentation of
evidence
These 6 domains interact
during the process of
interrogation.
The mesolevel interrogation
domains may provide a
useful, parsimonious
structure with which
scholars and operators can
study, analyse, and
influence interrogations.
,1. Rapport and Relationship building
- Finding common ground with interviewee; demonstrate kindness and respect; meet basic needs
(food, water) of interviewee
Based on respect, mutual trust, empathy and reciprocity
- 5 basic rules of rapport (St-Yvet)
Keep open mind and remain objective
Building up rapport
Pay attention
Keep professional attitude
Knowing how to conclude
- In Reid model, rapport-building starts in the distinct interview phase, but continues on into the
interrogation.
2. Context Manipulation: context manipulation speaks specifically to altering the physical and
temporal space where the interrogation occurs to maximize the probability of a successful
outcome.
E.g. isolation, ‘change of scenery’ where source is moved from formal interrogation room to
more neutral location to reduce stress.
3. Emotion Provocation: once report has established, interviewer needs to employ additional
techniques to increase cooperation or reduce resistance. Techniques within this domain focus on
raw emotions of the interviewee, or any real or perceived evidence against the interviewee.
Techniques include appealing to the source’s self-interest, conscience, or religion,
capitalizing on the stress of being captured or at other periods of heightened stress, and
exaggerating or alleviating the source’s fear.
4. Competition/Confrontation: confrontation relies on threats or perceived punishment,
competition relies upon a reward system, both of which are utilized to gain compliance with the
source.
The techniques in this domain build off those in the Emotion Provocation domain that
increase the source’s stress and may include the operator challenging the values of the
source, expressing impatience, frustration or anger, obscuring the fate of the source, and
employing deception in order to induce cooperation.
Zero-sum game: interviewer asserts authority and control over subject
E.g. good-bad cop: create contrast between unattractive and attractive persona of the two
interviewers, thereby create a collaborative relationship with the good cop.
5. Collaboration: authority and control are minimized or eliminated altogether. Interviewer and
interviewee are more equal partners in a working relationship in which each person has
something to offer the other.
2 forms: tangible: food, water, pillow, blanket (‘necessities’) & intangible (‘promises of
better treatment while detained or a reduced punishment for cooperation’)
E.g. offer rewards in change for information
6. Presentation of evidence: focuses on demonstrating the interviewee in various ways that the
authorities already know or claim to know in an attempt to receive more information.
To gain cooperation or compliance, test veracity or detecting deception.
, Theoretical Interactive Process Model of Interrogation
Theoretical exploration of how the domains relate to one
another in an interrogation session, or in the ongoing
relationship between operator and source.
All components of the model must function together in
order to work properly, but it does not necessarily imply
that all components are of equal import.
Rapport (=hub of model), is critical to any successful
interrogation. Must be present! We contend that it is from
rapport-based techniques that all others flow, for without
a minimum level of rapport between the operator and
source, the interrogation is unlikely to succeed. The other
techniques can be helpful, rapport can do without these
techniques, and techniques without rapport are unlikely
to be effective.
Contextual Manipulation envelops the model because the physical setting and other
noninterpersonal techniques ought to be considered in all interrogation settings. These factors
contribute to success of interrogation & it affects any of the other domains.
Once rapport is established, and depending on the contextual factors in the interrogation room, the
process moves on to one of the 4 interpersonal domains within the model.
- Emotion provocation & Presentation of Evidence = mediators (M can lead to zero-sum
relation of confrontation or partnership when they collaborate), or intermediate domains to both
the Confrontation/Competition and Collaboration domains.
Once operators move to employing the Confrontation/Competition or Collaboration domains, either
directly from Rapport & Relationship building or via mediating domains of Emotion Provocation and
Presentation of Evidence, there can be no-application of the other domains, without returning to the
central domain dead-ends (confrontation/competition & collaboration are not linked to one
another, nor do they directly lead to others). Of the six domains in the model, these represent the
two most diametrically opposed approaches, and the techniques within them are not likely to be
located in another domain.
Double-headed arrows between Rapport and Relationship Building and the other domains and the
single-headed ones emanating from Emotion Provocation and Presentation of Evidence are indicative
not just of the process of interrogation but also of the interdependent nature of the domains.
Kelly et al. (2015)- Examining the meso-level domains of the interrogation taxonomy
Using data from both a survey of American interrogators and investigative interviewers and a content
analysis of actual recorded interrogations, we examined reported and actual rates of use of the
domains, the relationship of the domains to one another, and their association with suspect
confession or denials.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper bloempje99. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $5.03. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 83430 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen
Laatst bekeken door jou
