We comment on the meta-analysis by Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013), which examined the validity of scores in Exner's Comprehensive System (CS) for the Rorschach. First, we agree there is compelling evidence that 4 categories of cognitive scores-the "Rorschach cognitive quartet"-are related to cognitive ability/impairment and thought disorder. We now feel comfortable endorsing the use of these scores in some applied and research settings. Second, we conducted new meta-analyses (k = 44) for the 4 noncognitive Rorschach scores with highest validity in the Mihura et al. findings. Unlike Mihura et al., we included unpublished dissertations (although we did not attempt to exhaustively unearth all unpublished studies), calculated correlations instead of semipartial correlations, and used the Rorschach International Norms for a larger proportion of comparisons. Our validity estimates for the Suicide Constellation and Weighted Sum of Color were similar to or even higher than those of Mihura et al., although we concluded that support for the Suicide Constellation is limited and that Weighted Sum of Color probably does not measure its intended target. Our validity estimates for Sum Shading and the Anatomy and X-ray score were much lower than those of Mihura et al. We conclude that their meta-analysis accurately reflects the published literature, but their exclusion of unpublished studies led to substantial overestimates of validity for some and perhaps many Rorschach scores. Therefore, the evidence is presently insufficient to justify using the CS to measure noncognitive characteristics such as emotionality, negative affect, and bodily preoccupations.

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.

In 2016, the U.S. Congress mandated that federal intelligence interrogators adhere to the methods of the U.S. Army Field Manual FM 2-22.3 (AFM) and that the manual be revised based upon empirically based evaluations of the interrogation methods' effectiveness with interviewees motivated to withhold information. In the present study, 120 participants took part in a testing situation in which half were induced to cheat. All participants were then accused of cheating and interrogated with either (a) a combination of AFM interrogation approaches that focused on the potential benefits of cooperation with the interviewer (cooperation-focused condition), or (b) a combination of AFM approaches that focused on the potential risks of withholding information (withholding-focused condition). Participants who cheated on the test were significantly more likely to admit their wrongdoing and to provide additional relevant information when interrogated with the withholding-focused approaches than when questioned with the cooperation-focused approaches. The "we know all" AFM approach was especially effective for eliciting truthful admission-related details. Participants reported high rapport with the interrogator in both the cooperation-focused and withholding-focused conditions. These findings indicate that the we-know-all approach can be effective for maintaining rapport and eliciting accurate information in brief interrogations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

No abstract

No abstract