Abstract
Objectives
Recent writing and research on interrogation has highlighted the potential importance of the physical context in which the interview takes place. Whereas manuals and self-reports from police investigators indicate how they can leverage the space to maximize control over subjects, arguments for non-coercive manipulation of the room context are emerging in the literature. For instance, in laboratory settings, positive effects on interview outcomes have been demonstrated where alterations were made to the room’s physical space.
Method
In collaboration with a large American police department, interviews with witnesses to serious violent crime were randomly assigned to an experimental or control context. The experimental room was altered to create a space that was intended to be more comfortable than the control context of a standard interrogation room.
Results
Seventy-seven post-interview questionnaires were completed by detectives and 50 were completed by witnesses that included items related to the interpersonal dynamics and how much the witnesses contributed to the investigation. Although not significantly different, witnesses in the experimental room reported it as being a more comfortable setting, and there is evidence that interpersonal dynamics were actually better in the control context.
Conclusions
As the first of its kind in a police setting, this study demonstrates that it is possible to manipulate the perceptions of space within an interrogation room; however, the manipulations did not have the intended effects based on the principles of implicit cognition. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is important to note that because the detectives work one of three shifts around the clock, these procedures were designed to be followed and administered by the detectives themselves, as it was not feasible for a member of the research team to be present at all times to ensure proper adherence to the protocol. Several measures were taken with respect to the case numbering system and how the questionnaires were collected to prevent deviation from the protocol.
The Mann-Whitney non-parametric test of differences was used only for the Interview and Dynamics_W variables because these measures demonstrated problematically high (> 1) skewness statistics.
References
Abbe, A., & Brandon, S. E. (2013). The role of rapport in investigative interviewing: a review. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 10, 237–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1386.
Bargh, J. A. (2014) The automaticity of everyday life. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Ed.), The automaticity of everyday life: advances in social cognition (Volume X), pp. 1-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315806327.
Bargh, J. A., & Williams, E. L. (2006). The automaticity of social life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00395.x.
Beauregard, E., & Mieczkowski, T. (2012). From police interrogation to prison: which sex offender charac- 639 teristics predict confession? Police Quarterly, 15(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/10986111112442814.
Carr, P. J., Napolitano, L., & Keating, J. (2007). We never call the cops and here is why: a qualitative examination of legal cynicism in three Philadelphia neighborhoods. Criminology, 45, 445–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2007.00084.x.
Cleary, H., & Warner, T. C. (2016). Police training in interviewing and interrogation methods: a comparison of techniques used with adult and juvenile suspects. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 270–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000175.
Dawson, E., & Hartwig, M. (2017). Rethinking the interview room: promoting disclosure and rapport through priming. Polygraph & Forensic Credibility Assessment: A Journal of Science and Field Practice, 46, 132–145.
Dawson, E., Hartwig, M., & Brimbal, L. (2015). Interviewing to elicit information: using priming to promote disclosure. Law and Human Behavior, 39, 443–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000136.
Dawson, E., Hartwig, M., Brimbal, L., & Denisenkov, P. (2017). A room with a view: setting influences information disclosure in investigative interviews. Law and Human Behavior, 41, 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000244.
Dawson, E., Hartwig, M., Hellgren, J, & Luke, T. J. Some like it warm: enhancing rapport through priming. Manuscript in preparation.
Deslauriers-Varin, N., Beauregard, E., & Wong, J. (2011). Changing their mind about confessing to police: the role of contextual factors in crime confession. Police Quarterly, 14(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611110392721.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.
Feld, B. C. (2006). Police interrogation of juveniles: an empirical study of policy and practice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97, 219–316.
Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.
Galetzka, C. (2017). The story so far: how embodied cognition advances our understanding of meaning-making. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01315.
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: the role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000310.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4.
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: a handbook. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2005). Police interrogation from a social psychology perspective. Policing and Society, 15, 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439460500309956.
Hoogesteyn, K., Meijer, E., & Vrij, A. (2019). The influence of room spaciousness on investigative interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24, 215-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12156
Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2013). Criminal interrogation and confessions (5th ed.). Burlington: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
Kassin, S. M., Leo, R. A., Meissner, C. A., Richman, K. D., Colwell, L. H., Leach, A. M., & La Fon, D. (2007). Police interviewing and interrogation: a self-report survey of police practices and beliefs. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9073-5.
Kelly, C. E., & Meissner, C. A. (2016). Interrogation and investigative interviewing of suspects in the United States. In D. Walsh et al. (Eds.), International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume II (pp. 255–266). Routledge: New York, NY.
Kelly, C. E., Miller, J. C., Redlich, A. D., & Kleinman, S. M. (2013). A taxonomy of interrogation methods. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19, 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030310.
Kelly, C. E., Redlich, A. D., & Miller, J. C. (2015). Examining the meso-level domains of the interrogation taxonomy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21, 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000034.
Kelly, C. E., Miller, J. C., & Redlich, A. D. (2016). The dynamic nature of interrogation. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000172.
Kelly, C. E., Russano, M. B., Miller, J. C., & Redlich, A. D. (2019). On the road (to admission): engaging Suspects with Minimization. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 25(3), 166-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000199.
King, L., & Snook, B. (2009). Peering inside a Canadian interrogation room: an examination of the Reid model of interrogation, influence tactics, and coercive strategies. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 674–694. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809335142.
Klauer, K., & Musch, C. (2003). Affective priming: findings and theories. In The psychology of evaluation: affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 9–50). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Kleinman, S. M. (2010). Generic interrogation approaches/themes. Unpublished document.
Lammers, J., Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2013). Power gets the job: priming power improves interview outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 776–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.008.
Landau, M. J., Meier, B. P., & Keefer, L. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1045–1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020970.
Leo, R. A. (1996). Inside the interrogation room. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 266–303. https://doi.org/10.2307/1144028.
Leovy, J. (2015). Ghettoside: a true story of murder in America. New York: Penguin Random House.
Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A. D., Michael, S. W., Evans, J. R., Camilletti, C. R., Bhatt, S., & Brandon, S. (2014). Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10, 459–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-014-9207-6.
Meissner, C. A., Kelly, C. E., & Woestehoff, S. A. (2015). Improving the effectiveness of suspect interrogations. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 11, 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121657.
Meissner, C. A., Surmon-Böhr, F., Oleszkiewicz, S., & Alison, L. J. (2017). Developing an evidence-based perspective on interrogation: a review of the US government’s high-value detainee interrogation group research program. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23, 438. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000136.
Miwa, Y., & Hanyu, K. (2006). The effects of interior design on communication and impressions of a counselor in a counseling room. Environment and Behavior, 38, 484–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916505280084.
Okken, V., van Rompay, T., & Pruyn, A. (2012). Exploring space in the consultation room: environmental influences during patient-physician interaction. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 397–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.626498.
Okken, V., van Rompay, T., & Pruyn, A. (2013). Room to move: on spatial constraints and self-disclosure during intimate conversations. Environment and Behavior, 45, 737–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512444780.
Philadelphia Police Department (2015). Major crimes-citywide-as reported to P.P.D for 2015. Crime Maps & Stats online, https://www.phillypolice.com/crime-maps-stats/.
Redlich, A. D., Kelly, C. E., & Miller, J. C. (2014). The who, what, and why of human intelligence gathering: self-reported measures of interrogation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 817–828. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3040.
Russano, M. B., Narchet, F. M., Kleinman, S. M., & Meissner, C. A. (2014). Structured interviews of experienced HUMINT interrogators. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 847–859. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3069.
Russano, M. B., Kelly, C. E., & Meissner, C. A. (2019). From the ivory tower to the interrogation room: training and field evaluation research on suspect interviewing. In R. Bull & I. Blandon-Gitlin (Eds.), Handbook of Legal and Investigative Psychology. New York: Routledge.
Smith, P. K., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). The nonconscious nature of power: cues and consequences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 918–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00300.x.
Soukara, S., Bull, R., Vrij, A., Turner, M., & Cherryman, J. (2009). What really happens in police interviews of suspects? Tactics and confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15, 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160802201827.
Vallano, J. P., & Schreiber Compo, N. (2011). A comfortable witness is a good witness: rapport-building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock-crime interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 960–970. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1789.
Vallano, J. P., & Schreiber Compo, N. (2015). Rapport-building with cooperative witnesses and criminal suspects: a theoretical and empirical review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21, 85. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000035.
Verhoeven, W.-J. (2018). The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance: evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews. Policing and Society, 18, 308–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2016.1157594.
Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2010). Interviewing suspects of fraud: an in-depth analysis of interviewing skills. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 38, 99–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/009318531003800106.
Walsh, D., Oxburgh, G. E., Redlich, A. D., & Myklebust, T. (2016). International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 1: victims and witnesses. Abingdon: Routledge.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), contract #303-15. Statements of fact, opinion and analysis in the paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the HIG, FBI or the U.S. Government. An earlier version of this research was presented at the 2017 American Psychology-Law Society meeting in Seattle, WA. The authors wish to thank the HIG and FBI, as well as the following individuals: Susan Brandon, Joeanna Arthur, and Christian Meissner for their invaluable support and feedback. We also thank the following members of the Philadelphia Police Department for their essential roles in making this study a reality: Former Deputy Commissioners Nola Joyce and Kevin Bethel, Captain Francis Healy, Captain Anthony Catalini, Captain John Walker, and Lieutenant John Anselmo.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kelly, C.E., Dawson, E. & Hartwig, M. Context manipulation in police interviews: a field experiment. J Exp Criminol 17, 67–86 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09389-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09389-8