International consensus on effective and ineffective interviewing strategies: a survey of experienced practitioners

Sivasubramaniam, Diane; Goodman‐Delahunty, Jane

doi:10.1080/15614263.2019.1628756

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, it is known that police groups around the world have different organizational cultures and operate in different legal systems, which can affect the results of criminal investigations (Innes, 2002(Innes, , 2003Wachi et al, 2014). However, the data in these studies were consistent with previous studies: Study Ⅰ showed that physical (vs. personal) evidence affected police investigators' decisionmaking (Alderden & Ullman, 2012;Alderden et al, 2018;Martire et al, 2019); Study Ⅱ showed that police investigators use nonevidential tactics most frequently (Miller et al, 2018;Sivasubramaniam & Goodman-Delahunty, 2019;Wachi et al, 2014); and studies Ⅲa and b also provide consistent support that evidential tactics increase the perceived evidence (Hartwig et al, 2014;Luke et al, 2014).…”

Section: Realism Motivation and Samplesupporting

confidence: 75%

“…Rather than adopting questionable tactics, interrogators can use some tactics that are completely irrelevant to crime details or their available evidence. International surveys of practitioners have reported that interrogators prefer to use nonevidential and crime-irrelevant tactics (Miller et al, 2018;Redlich et al, 2014;Sivasubramaniam & Goodman-Delahunty, 2019). For instance, interrogators can ask suspects about what they need, find something in common, or listen actively to what the suspect says (Miller et al, 2018; see also Wachi et al, 2014).…”

Section: Evidence Use During Interrogationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Impact of Evidence Type on Police Investigators’ Perceptions of Suspect Culpability and Evidence Reliability

Minhwan

Luke

Granhag

et al. 2020

Zeitschrift für Psychologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In a repeated-measures experimental study, we examined how evidence type influences police investigators’ beliefs about (a) suspect’s culpability and (b) reliability of incriminating evidence. South Korean detectives ( N = 202) read four crime reports including general information about a crime and a suspect. In the general case information, one piece of critical and several pieces of noncritical evidence collected during the investigation were presented. Officers read four simulated reports of crimes, and in each report, they were given one piece of evidence linking the suspect to the crime. We manipulated the critical evidence identifying the suspect with four evidence types: CCTV, DNA, fingerprint, and eyewitness testimony. We found that evidence type influenced detectives’ judgments about suspect’s culpability and evidence reliability, such that when eyewitness (vs. CCTV, DNA, fingerprint) evidence was given as critical evidence, officers were more likely to think that the suspect was less culpable and that the evidence was less reliable. Theoretical and legal implications of these results are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Realism Motivation and Samplesupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Evidence Use During Interrogationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Evidence Type on Police Investigators’ Perceptions of Suspect Culpability and Evidence Reliability

Minhwan

Luke

Granhag

et al. 2020

Zeitschrift für Psychologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The questionnaire was that used by Sivasubramaniam and Goodman-Delahunty (2021) (see also Redlich et al, 2014). It contained 67 statements on a five-point Likert scale, in which respondents self-report the frequency with which they use each interviewing technique (1 = never to 5 = always).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigative interviewing with suspects: Exploring current practices among Malaysian police

Chung,

Wong,

Kamaluddin

et al. 2023

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interviewing of suspects is a key component in the investigation process. Although a great deal of research on interrogation and interviewing techniques has been conducted in the past, much of this work has been undertaken outside South East Asia. This new study examined Malaysian police officers’ reported rate of use of a large variety of investigative interviewing techniques categorised into six domains: rapport and relationship building, context manipulation, emotion provocation, confrontation/competition, collaboration and presentation of evidence. Eighty-eight police officers primarily from the criminal investigation department, narcotics crime investigation department, commercial crime investigation department, and traffic enforcement and investigation department participated in a pen-and-paper survey. Findings revealed that many police officers in the current study report adopting investigative interviewing techniques that are largely in line with ethical, non-coercive guidelines.

show abstract

“…Second, surveys of investigative interviewing practitioners have been conducted by teams of psychologists in different countries and jurisdictions, some of which have focused on interpreted police interviews (e.g., Shaffer & Evans, 2018 in the USA; Wakefield et al, 2014 in Australia). Although some research teams administered identical surveys in different jurisdictions (e.g., Miller, Redlich, & Kelly, 2018;Redlich, Kelly, & Miller, 2014;Sivasubramaniam & Goodman-Delahunty, 2019), no rigorous jurisdictional comparisons of the outcomes on interpreting have been undertaken.…”

Section: Field Surveys Of Stakeholders In Interpreted Police Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpreted Police Interviews: A Review of Contemporary Research

Goodman‐Delahunty

Martschuk

Hale

et al. 2020

Advances in Psychology and Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criminal justice proceedings are high-stakes settings in which native English speakers have difficulty negotiating the legal process, let alone persons with no or limited English proficiency. Increasingly, law enforcement interviewers are required to rely on interpreters (Mulayim & Lai, 2017;Shaffer & Evans, 2018). However, the mere presence of an interpreter does not guarantee accurate interpreting. If the interpretation is inaccurate, evidence can be misconstrued, affecting assessments of witness veracity and credibility. This can compromise the right of the parties to a fair trial and lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals, costly appeals, and retrials. The scale of the problem has been recognized by members of the judiciary, who for many years have complained that the poor quality of interpreters is detrimental to the court's ability to perform its duties (Hale, 2011). In response to calls for improvement, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe (1950), and comparable bodies in other jurisdictions mandated that interpreters be fully competent for the task assigned (Hertog, 2015). The assigned tasks include interpreting in the investigative phases of the criminal justice process, including suspect and witness interrogations and intelligence interviews. In different jurisdictions, the terminology applied to law enforcement interviews varies. In Australia and the United Kingdom (UK), the

show abstract

International consensus on effective and ineffective interviewing strategies: a survey of experienced practitioners

Cited by 6 publications

References 41 publications

The Impact of Evidence Type on Police Investigators’ Perceptions of Suspect Culpability and Evidence Reliability

The Impact of Evidence Type on Police Investigators’ Perceptions of Suspect Culpability and Evidence Reliability

Investigative interviewing with suspects: Exploring current practices among Malaysian police

Interpreted Police Interviews: A Review of Contemporary Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About