Between Investigator and Suspect: The Role of the Working Alliance in Investigative Interviewing

Chapter

Abstract

The importance of building rapport when interviewing witnesses and suspects is emphasized in many interview models developed in Europe as well as in the United States. The construct of rapport shows a number of similarities with the construct of the working alliance, which is already extensively examined in therapeutic settings. Despite the important predictive role found in therapy, the role of the working alliance in investigative interviewing was not addressed in police research. The present study aims at looking into possible benefits of using the theoretical framework and the operationalisation of the working alliance in order to gain insights into the dynamics of investigative interviewing. It is examined to what extent the working alliance contributes to satisfaction with the interview from both investigators and interviewees in actual interviews. It also considers which factors are important to the working alliance. Besides therapeutic factors the study also explores significant factors from investigative interviewing literature on building rapport. Self-report questionnaires completed by investigators and interviewees show the mediating role of the working alliance between empathy, interview style, clarity of the interview and interview satisfaction. The research findings will also be discussed in the light of interview training and follow-up. More in particular, experiences with building rapport from interview training will be presented as well as experiences from a supervision project on suspect interviewing. Finally, in light of the recent Salduz case law and the subsequent introduction of legal advice in Europe, police officers’ views on building rapport with suspects and lawyers are touched upon.

Keywords

Suspect Working-alliance Rapport Interview style Legal advice Training 

References

  1. Alison, L., Sarangi, S., & Wright, A. L. (2008a). Human rights is not enough: The need for demonstrating efficacy of an ethical approach to interviewing in India. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alison, L., Kebbell, M., & Leung, J. (2008b). A facet analysis of police officers’ self-reported use of suspect-interviewing strategies and their discomfort with ambiguity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1072–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arrindell, W. A., & Ettema, J. H. M. (1989). SCL-90. Handleiding bij een multidimensionele psychopathologie-indicator. [Manual for a multidimensional psychopathology-indicator] Groningen: Vakgroep Klinische Psychologie.Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, J. (1993). Police interview techniques: Establishing the truth or proof? The British Journal of Criminology, 33(3), 325–352.Google Scholar
  5. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1962). Dimensions of therapist response as causal factors in therapeutic change. Psychological Monographs, 76, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bedi, R. P., Davis, M. D., & Williams, M. (2005). Critical incidents in the formation of the therapeutic alliance from the client’s perspective. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 42, 311–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beutler, L. E., Malik, M., Alimohamed, S., Harwood, M. T., Talebi, H., Noble, S., & Wong, E. (2004). Therapist Variables. In M. J. Lambert (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 227–306). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Bordin, E. S. (1976). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, research and practice, 16(3), 252–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borum, R., Gelles, M. G., & Kleinman, S. M. (2009). Interview and interrogation: a perspective and update from the USA. In T. Williamson, B. Milne, & S. P. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 111–125). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Brean, J. (2011). Police interrogation techniques under scrutiny due to false confessions, National Post, 25 November 2011.Google Scholar
  12. Buckley, J. P. (2006). The Reid technique of interviewing and interrogation. In T. Williamson (Ed.), Investigative interviewing. Rights, research, regulation (pp. 190–206). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Bull, R., & Cherryman, J. (1996). Helping to identify skills gaps in specialist investigative interviewing: Enhancement of professional skills. London: Home Office, Police Department.Google Scholar
  14. Bull, R., & Milne, R. (2004). Attempts to improve the police interviewing of suspects. In D. G. Lassiter (Ed.), Interrogation, confessions and entrapment (pp. 181-196). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Bull, R., & Soukara, S. (2010). Four studies of what really happens in police interviews. In G. D. Lassiter & C. A. Meissner (Eds.), Police interrogation and false confessions. Current research, practice and policy recommendations (pp. 81–96). Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  16. Butler, S. F., & Strupp, H. H. (1986). Specific and nonspecific factors in psychotherapy: A problematic paradigm for psychotherapy research. Psychotherapy, 23, 30–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clarke, C., & Milne, R. (2001). National evaluation of the PEACE investigative interviewing course. Report n°: PRAS/149. London: The Home Office.Google Scholar
  18. Clarke, C., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2011). Interviewing suspects of crime: The impact of PEACE training, supervision and the presence of a legal advisor. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8(2), 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Collins, R., Lincoln, R., & Frank, M. G. (2002). The effect of rapport in forensic interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 9(1), 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Collins, R., Lincoln, R., & Frank, M. G. (2005). The need for rapport in police interviews. Humanities & Social Sciences papers. Robina: Bond University.Google Scholar
  21. Cook, M. (1970). Experiments on orientation and proxemics. Human Relations, 23(1), 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crawshaw, R., Devlin, B., & Williamson, T. (1998). Human rights and policing: Standards for good behaviour and a strategy for change. Den Haag: Kluwer International.Google Scholar
  23. Davies, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Davies, M., & Shen, A. (2010). Questioning suspected offenders: The investigative interviewing process in the People’s Republic of China. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 10(3), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. De Smet, B. (1999). Internationale samenwerking tussen Angelsaksische en continentale landen: Een studie over breuken tussen accusatoire en inquisitoire processtelsels bij de uitlevering, kleine rechtshulp en overdracht van strafvervolging [International collaboration between Common law and continental countries: a study on flaws between accusatorial and inquisitorial legal systems]. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
  26. Dixon, D. (2007). Interrogating images audio-visually recorded police questioning of suspects. Sydney: Sydney Institute of Criminology.Google Scholar
  27. Dixon, D. (2009). From criminal justice to control process: Interrogation in a changing context. In R. Bull, T. Valentine, & T. Williamson (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology of investigative interviewing. Current developments and future directions (pp. 91–108). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Driskell, T., Blickensderfer, E. L., & Salas, E. (2012). Is three a crowd? Examining rapport in investigative interviews. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. Evans, J. R., Meissner, C. A., Brandon, S. E., Russano, M. B., & Kleinman, S. M. (2010). Criminal versus HUMINT interrogations: The importance of psychological science to improving interrogative practice. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 38(1 & 2), 215–249.Google Scholar
  30. Fisher, R. P. (2010). Interviewing cooperative witnesses. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.Google Scholar
  32. Fisher, R. P., & Perez, V. (2007). Memory-enhancing techniques for interviewing crime suspects. In S. A. Christianson (Ed.), Offenders’ memories of violent crimes (pp. 329–354). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. Frank, M. G., Yarbrough, J. D., & Ekman, P. (2006). Investigative interviewing and the detection of deception. In T. Williamson (Ed.), Investigative interviewing. Rights, research, regulation (pp. 229–255). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Gelles, M. G., McFadden, R., Borum, R., & Vossekuil, B. (2006). Al-Qaeda-related subjets: A law enforcement perspective. In T. Williamson (Ed.), Investigative interviewing. Rights, research, regulation (pp. 23–41). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Gelso, C. J., & Carter, J. A. (1985). The relationship in counseling and psychotherapy: Components, consequences and theroretical antecedents. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 155–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gelso, C. J., & Carter, J. A. (1994). Components of psychotherapy relationship: Their interaction and unfolding during treatment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Green, T. (2012). The future of investigative interviewing: Lessons for Australia. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44(1), 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Griffiths, A., & Milne, R. (2006). Will it all end in tiers? Police interviews with suspects in Britain. In T. Williamson (Ed.), Investigative interviewing: rights, research and regulation (pp. 167–189). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichster: Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2006). Sex offenders and confessions: How to overcome their resistance during questioning. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 13, 203–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Pearse, J. (2011). Suspect interviews and false confessions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Häkkänen, H., Ask, K., Kebbell, M., Alison, L., & Granhag, P. A. (2009). Police officers’ views of effective interview tactics with suspects: The effects of weight of case evidence and discomfort with ambiguity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 468–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hartwig, M. (2005). Interrogation to detect deception and truth: Effects of strategic use of evidence. Sweden: Göteborg University.Google Scholar
  44. Hatcher, R. L., & Gillaspy, A. J. (2006). Development and validation of a revised short version of the working alliance inventory. Psychotherapy Research, 16(1), 12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hentschel, U. (2005). Therapeutic alliance: The best synthesizer of social influences on the therapeutic situation? On links to other constructs, determinants of its effectiveness, and its role for research in psychotherapy in general. Psychotherapy Research, 15, 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Holmberg, U. (2004). Police interviews with victims and suspects of violent sexual crimes: Interviewee’s experiences and outcomes. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Department of Psychology.Google Scholar
  47. Holmberg, U. (2009). Investigative interviewing as a therapeutic jurisprudential approach. In T. Williamson, B. Milne, & S. P. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 149–175).Google Scholar
  48. Holmberg, U., & Christianson, S.-A. (2002). Murderers’ and sexual offenders’ experiences of police interviews and their inclination to admit or deny crimes. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 31–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Holmberg, U., & Madsen, K. (2010, June). Humanity and dominance in police interviews; causes and effects. Paper presented at the 4th International Investigative Conference, Brussels.Google Scholar
  50. Horvath, A. O. (2005). The therapeutic relationship: Research and theory. An introduction to the special issue. Psychotherapy Research, 15, 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Horvath, A. O., & Bedi, R. P. (2002). The alliance. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients (pp. 37–70). Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Horvath, A. O., & Symonds, D. B. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(2), 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Horvath, A. O., & Greenberg, L. S. (1989). Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36(2), 223–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hubbard, K. M. (2007). Psychologists and interrogations: What’s torture got to do with it? Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 29–33.Google Scholar
  55. Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. C. (2004). Criminal interrogation and confession. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.Google Scholar
  56. Kalbfleisch, P. J. (1994). The language of detecting deceit. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13, 469–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kassin, S. M., Appleby, S. C., & Torkildson Perillo, J. (2010). Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kebbell, M., Hurren, E., & Mazerolle, P. (2006). An investigation into the effective and ethical interviewing of suspected sex offenders (Final Report, Criminology Research Council 12/03–04). Canberra: Criminology Research Council.Google Scholar
  60. Kokotovic, A. M., & Tracey, T. J. (1990). Working alliance in the early phase of counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(1), 16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lietaer, G. (1976). Nederlandstalige revisie van Barrett-Lennard’s Relationship Inventory voor individueel-tehrapeutische relaties. Psychologica Belgica, 16, 73–94.Google Scholar
  62. Luborsky, L., McLellan, A. T., Diguer, L., Woody, G., & Seligman, D. A. (1997). The psychotherapist matters: Comparison of outcome across twenty-two therapists and seven patient-samples. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 4, 53–65.Google Scholar
  63. Martin, D. J., Garske, J. P., & Davis, K. M. (2000). Relation of therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(3), 438–450.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A., Bhatt, S., & Brandon, S. (2012). Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions. Campbell Systematic Reviews 2012:13. Oslo: The Campbell Collaboration.Google Scholar
  65. Meissner, C. A., Russano, M. B., & Narchet, F. M. (2010). The importance of a laboratory science for improving the diagnostic value of confession evidence. In G. D. Lassiter & C. Meissner’s (Eds.), Police Interrogations and false confessions: Current research, practice, and policy r ecommendations (pp. 111–126). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  66. Milne, R., & Bull, R. (1999). Investigative interviewing: Psychology and practice. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  67. Morgan, R., & Williamson, T. (2009). A critical analysis of the utilitarian case for torture and the situational factors that lead some people to become torturers. In T. Williamson, B. Milne, & S. P. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 129–148). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  68. Moston, S., & Engelberg, T. (1993). Police questioning techniques in tape recorded interviews with criminal suspects. Policing and Society, 3, 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Moston, S., & Fisher, M. (2007). Perceptions of coercion in the questioning of criminal suspects. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 4(2), 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Nolan, M. (2009). Case Commentary. Counter-terrorism interviewing and investigative interoperability: R v ul-Haque [2007] NSWSC 1251. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16(2), 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ord, B., Shaw, G., & Green, T. (2011). Investigative interviewing explained. Chatswood: Lexis Nexis.Google Scholar
  72. Orlinsky, D. E., Grawe, K., & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy—noch einmal. In A. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 270–378). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  73. Orlinsky, D. E., & Howard, K. I. (1986). Process and outcome in psychotherapy. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 311–384). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  74. Orlinsky, D. E., Rønnestad, M. H., & Willutzki, U. (2004). Fifty years of psychotherapy process-outcome research: Continuity and change. In M. J. Lambert (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 307–390). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  75. Oxburgh, G., & Ost, J. (2011). The use and efficacy of empathy in police interviews with suspects of sexual offences. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8(2), 178–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Pearse, J. J. (2006). The interrogation of terrorist suspects: The banality of torture. In T. Williamson (Ed.). Investigative interviewing. Rights, research, regulation (pp. 64–83). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  77. Pearse, J., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (1996). Police interviewing techniques at two South London police stations. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pinizzotto, A. J., & Davis, E. F. (1996). Interviewing methods. A specialized approach is needed when investigating police deaths. Law and Order, november, 68–72.Google Scholar
  79. Ponsaers, P., Mulkers, J., & Stoop, R. (2001). De ondervraging: Analyse van een politietechniek. Antwerpen: Maklu.Google Scholar
  80. Poole, E. D., & Pogrebin, M. R. (1989). Attribution and empathy: Detectives and subjects under arrest. Police Studies, 12(3), 132–139.Google Scholar
  81. Powell, M. B., Fisher, R. P., & Wright, R. (2005). Investigative Interviewing. In N. Brewer & K. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 11-42). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  82. Quale, J. (2008). Interviewing a psychopathic suspect. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 5(1–2), 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Roberts, K. A. (2011). Police interviews with terrorist suspects: Risks, ethical interviewing and procedural justice. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 13(2), 124–134.Google Scholar
  84. Sanchez-Burks, J. (2002). Protestant relational ideology and (in)attention to relational cues in work settings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 919–929.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Sandoval, V. A., & Adams, S. H. (2001). Subtle skills for building rapport: Using neuro-linguistic programming in the interview room. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 1–5.Google Scholar
  86. Schreiber Compo, N., Gregory, A. H., & Fisher, R. (2012). Interviewing behaviors in police investigators: A field study of a current US sample. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(4), 359–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sellers, S., & Kebbell, M. R. (2009). When should evidence be disclosed in an interview with a suspect? An experiment with mock-suspects. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 6(2), 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Seps, K. (1997). Werkalliantie: Literatuuroverzicht en herziening van de WAV [Literature overview and revision of the WAI]. Unpublished dissertation. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  89. Sharpley, C. F., & Guidara, D. A. (1993). Counsellor verbal response mode usage and client-perceived rapport. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 6(2), 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Sharpley, C. F., & Ridgway, I. R. (1992). Development and field-testing of a procedure for coached clients to assess rapport. Counselling Psychology Quareterly, 5(2), 149–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sharpley, C. F., Guidara, D. A., & Rowley, M. A. (1994). Psychometric evaluation of a ‘standardized client’ procedure with trainee counselors. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 7(1), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Sharpley, C. F., Halat, J., Rabinowicz, T., Weiland, B., & Stafford, J. (2001). Standard posture, postural mirroring and client-perceived rapport. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 14(4), 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Shawyer, A., Milne, B., & Bull, R. (2009). Investigative interviewing in the UK. In T. Williamson, B. Milne, & S. P. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 24–38). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  94. Shepherd, E. (2007). Investigative interviewing: The conversation management approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Shepherd, E., & Milne, R. (2006). Have you told management about this?: Bringing witness interviewing into the twenty-first century. In A. Heaton-Armstrong, E. Shepherd, G. Gudjonsson, & D. Wolchover (Eds.), Witness testimony: Psychological, investigative and evidential perspectives (pp. 131–151). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Snook, B., Eastwoord, J., Stinson, M., Tedechini, J., & House, J. C. (2010). Reforming investigative interviewing in Canada. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 52(2), 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Stokoe, E. (2009). “I’ve got a girlfriend”: Police officers doing ‘self-disclosure’ in their interrogations of suspects. Narrative Inquiry, 19(1), 154–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. St-Yves, M. (2006). The psychology of rapport: Five basic rules. In T. Williamson (Ed.), Investigative interviewing: Rights, research and regulation (pp. 87–105). Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  99. St-Yves, M. (2009). Police interrogation in Canada: from the quest for confessions to the search for the truth. In T. Williamson, B. Milne, & S. P. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 92–110). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  100. St-Yves, M., & Deslauriers-Varin, N. (2009). The psychology of suspects’ decision-making during interrogation. In R. Bull, T. Valentine & T. Williamson (Eds.), Handbook of psychology of investigative interviewing. Current developments and future directions (pp. 1–15). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  101. Tickle-Degnen, L. (2002). Client-centered practice, therapeutic relationship, and the use of research evidence. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56(4), 470–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Tickle-Degnen, L., & Rosenthal, R. (1987). Group rapport and non-verbal behaviour. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Group processes and intergroup relations (pp. 113–136). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  103. Tickle-Degnen, L., & Rosenthal, R. (1990). The nature of rapport and its nonverbal correlates. Psychological Inquiry, 1(4), 285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Vallano, J., Schreiber Compo, N., Wood, S., Perry, A., Lobos, A. M., Villalba, D., Kemp, D., & Cochran, J. (2008). Rapport-building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock crime interview. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, 5th March 2008.Google Scholar
  106. Van Amelsvoort, A., Rispens, I., & Grolman, H. (2010). Handleiding verhoor [Interrogation manual]. ’s Gravenhage: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  107. Van De Plas, M. (2007). Handboek politieverhoor: Basistechnieken. [Manual of police interviewing: Basic techniques]. Brussel: Politeia.Google Scholar
  108. Vanderhallen, M. (2007). De werkalliantie in het politieverhoor [The working alliance in police interviewing]. Unpublished PhD thesis. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  109. Vanderhallen, M., & Lei, C. (2012). Skills for interrogating criminal suspects. In C. Weidong & T. Spronken (Eds.), Three approaches to combating torture in China (pp. 203–236). Cambridge: Intersentia.Google Scholar
  110. Vanderhallen, M., Vervaeke, G., & Holmberg, U. (2011). Witness and suspect perceptions of working alliance and interviewing style. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8(2), 110–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Vanderhallen, M., Vervaeke, G., & Michaux, E. M. (2013). Experiences from training and supervision in real (video-recorded) suspect interviews in Belgium: Pitfalls and opportunities. iIIRG-Bulletin, 5(1), 36–45.Google Scholar
  112. Volckaert, M. (2005). Verhoor in de basisopleiding voor inspecteur van politie [Interviewing in the basic training for police officers]. Unpublished dissertation. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  113. Vrij, A., Mann, S., & Fisher, R. (2006). Information-gathering vs accusatory interview style: Individual differences in respondents’ experiences. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 589–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Walsh, D. W., & Bull, R. H. (2010a). What really is effective in interviews with suspects? A study comparing interview skills against interview outcomes. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2010b). Interviewing suspects of fraud: An in-depth analysis of interviewing skills. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 38, 99–135.Google Scholar
  116. Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2012a). Examining rapport in investigative interviews with suspects: Does its building and maintenance work? Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 27, 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2012b). How do interviewers attempt to overcome suspects’ denials? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19(2), 151–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Walsh, D. W., & Milne, R. (2008). Keeping the PEACE? A study of investigative interviewing practices in the public sector. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Watson, J. C., & Geller, S. M. (2005). The relation among the relationship conditions, working alliance, and outcome in both process-experienced and cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy. Psychotherpy Research, 15, 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Weidong, C., Lei, C., & Spronken, T. (2012). A three-way approach to the fight against torture. Procedural sanctions, prevention in places of detention, and improvement of police interrogation techniques. In C. Weidong, & T. Spronken (Eds.), Three approaches to combating torture in China (pp. 1–7). Cambridge: Intersentia.Google Scholar
  121. Yeschke, C. L. (2003). The art of investigative interviewing. Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann Elsevier Science.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Antwerp UniversityAntwerpBelgium
  2. 2.Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  4. 4.University of Leuven—LeuvenFlandersBelgium

Personalised recommendations