Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

When in Interviews to Disclose Information to Suspects and to Challenge Them?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Investigative Interviewing

Abstract

This chapter commences with mention of the common beliefs (1) that guilty suspects may well be unlikely to admit to their wrong-doing and (2) thus that confessions need to be coerced out of them. Then, recent research on what guilty suspects have actually said about their pre-interview willingness to admit/confess will be described, including the finding that a notable proportion had already decided to confess and that the majority had not yet made up their mind about denying/confessing. After this an overview is presented of recommendations made since the 1980s concerning how to reduce the resistance some suspects (especially guilty ones) may feel about talking in interviews with investigators. Following this, the practice over the decades in several countries of revealing to suspects all the information known to interviewers at the beginning of the interview, in the hope of this causing confessions, will be described. Then recent research on when in interviews it is better to confront suspects with information that may incriminate them will be presented, including our own research on the ‘gradual’/’GRIMACE’ approach. The chapter will end with a brief account of one of the best interrogators of all time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alison, L., Sarangi, S., & Wright, A. (2008). Human rights is not enough: The need for demonstrating efficacy of an ethical approach to interviewing in India. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 13, 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J. (1992). Video-taping of police interviews with suspects—An evaluation. Police research series paper No. 1. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J. (1993). Police interview techniques. Establishing truth or proof? British Journal of Criminology, 33, 325–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, P., Levine, T., & Shaw, A. (2010). Content in context improves detection accuracy. Human Communication Research, 36, 423–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bull, R., & Soukara, S. (2010). A set of studies of what really happens in police interviews with suspects. In G. D. Lassiter & C. Meissner (Eds.), Interrogations and confessions. Washington: American Psychological Association.81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, R., Bustin, R., Evans, P., & Gahagan, D. (1983). Psychology for police officers. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centre for Investigative Skills. (2004). Practical guide to investigative interviewing (4th ed.). CENTREX (Central Police Training and Development Authority).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dando, C., & Bull, R. (2011). Maximising opportunities to detect verbal deception: Training police officers to interview tactically. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8, 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dando, C., Bull, R., Ormerod, T., & Sandham, A. (In press). Helping to sort the liars from the truth-tellers: The gradual revelation of information during investigative interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Keijser J., Malsch, M., Kranendonk, R., & de Gruijter, M. (2012). Written records of police interrogation: Differential registration as determinant of statement credibility and interrogation quality. Psychology, Crime and Law, 18, 613–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B., & Bond, C. (2012). Beyond accuracy: Bigger, broader ways to think about deceit. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 120–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deslauriers-Varin, N., & St-Yves, M. (2006). An empirical investigation of offenders’ decision to confess their crime during police interrogation. Paper presented at the Second International Investigative Interviewing Conference, July, Portsmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deslauriers-Varin, N., & St-Yves, M. (2009). The psychology of suspects’ decision-making during interrogation. In R. Bull, T. Valentine, & T. Williamson (Eds.), Handbook of psychology of investigative interviewing (pp. 1–16). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deslauriers-Varin, N., Lussier, P., & St-Yves, M. (2011). Confessing their crime: Factors influencing the offender’s decision to confess to the police. Justice Quarterly, 28, 113–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L.A., & Hartwig, M. (2007). The SUE-technique: The way to interview to detect deception. Forensic Update, 88, 25–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson, G. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonnson, G. (2006). Sex offenders and confessions: How to overcome their resistance during questioning. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 13, 203–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson, G., & Bownes, I. (1992). The reasons why suspects confess during custodial interrogation: Data for Northern Ireland. Medicine, Science, and the Law, 32, 204–212.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson, G., & Clark, N. (1986). Suggestibility in police interrogation: A social psychological model. Social Behaviour, 1, 83–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson, G., & Petursson, H. (1991). Custodial interrogation: Why do suspects confess and how does it relate to their crime, attitude and personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 295–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L., & Vrij, A. (2005). Detecting deception via strategic disclosure of evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 469–484.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Kronkvist, O. (2006). Strategic use of evidence during police interviews: When training to detect deception works. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 603–619.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L., Wolf, A., Vrij, A., & Roos af Hjelmsäter, E. (2011). Detecting deception in suspects: Verbal cues as a function of interview strategy. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 17, 643–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Meissner, C., & Semel, M. (2014). Human intelligence gathering and interrogation: Assessing the challenges of developing an ethical, evidence-based approach. In R. Bull (Ed.), Investigative interviewing. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, W. (2002). Criminal interrogation: A modern format for interrogating criminal suspects based on the intellectual approach. Springfield, Ill: C.C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horgan, A., Russano, M., Meissner, C., & Evans, J. (2012). Minimization and maximization techniques: Assessing the perceived consequences of confessing and confession diagnosticity. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18, 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, S., Hartwig, M., Wallace, B., Dawson, E., & Xhihani, A. (2012). Early versus late disclosure of evidence: Effects on verbal cues to deception, confessions, and lie catchers’ accuracy. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 9, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kebbell, M., Hurren, E., & Mazerolle, P. (2006). An investigation into the effective and ethical interviewing of suspected sex offenders. Final report to the Australian Criminology Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kebbell, M., Alison, L., & Hurren, E. (2008). Sex offenders’ perceptions of the effectiveness and fairness of humanity, dominance, and displaying an understanding of cognitive distortions in police interviews: A vignette study. Psychology, Crime and Law, 14, 435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kebbell, M., Alison, L., Hurren, E., & Mazerolle, P. (2010). How do sex offenders think the police should interview to elicit confessions from sex offenders? Psychology, Crime and Law, 16, 567–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komter, M.L. (2003). The interactional dynamics of eliciting a confession in a Dutch police interrogation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36, 433–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leo, R. (1996). Inside the interrogation room. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 266–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leo, R. (2008). Police interrogation and American justice. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne R., & Bull, R. (1999). Investigative interviewing: Psychology and practice. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moston, S., Stephenson, G., & Williamson, T. (1992). The effects of case characteristics on suspect behaviour during police questioning. British Journal of Criminology, 32, 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Crime Faculty. (1996). Investigative interviewing: A practical guide. Bramshill: Police Staff College.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, T., & Carson, W. (December 2005). Understanding the psychology of child molesters: A key to getting confessions. The Police Chief, 72, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Levine, T., McCormack, S., Morrison, K., & Ferrea, M. (2002). How people really detect lies. Communication Monographs, 69, 144–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rachlew, A. (2002). Oslo Police investigative interviewing programme: KREATIV—Based on the PEACE approach. Paper presented at the Seventh Investigative Psychology Conference, Liverpool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, J., Powell, M., Kebbell, M., & Milne, R. (2009). Investigative interviewing of sex offenders: A review of what constitutes best practice. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 11, 442–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K. (2011). Police interviews with terrorist suspects: Risks, ethical interviewing and procedural justice. British Journal of Forensic Practice, 13, 124–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, S., & Kebbell, M. (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, 151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellers, S., & Kebbell, M. (2011). The role of evidence in the interviewing of suspects: An analysis of Australian Police transcripts. British Journal of Forensic Practice, 13, 84–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, E. (1991). Ethical interviewing. Policing, 7, 42–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, E., & Mortimer, A. (1999). Identifying anomaly in evidential text. In A. Heaton-Armstrong, E. Shepherd, & D. Wolchover (Eds.), Analysing witness testimony: A guide for legal practitioners and other professionals (pp. 267–320). London: Blackstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L., & Bull, R. (In press). Exploring the disclosure of forensic evidence in police interviews with suspects. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorochinski, M., Hartwig, M., Osborne, J., Wilkins, E., Marsh, J., Kazakov, D., & Granhag, P. A. (In press). Interviewing to detect deception: When to disclose the evidence? Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soukara, S. (2005). Investigative interviewing of suspects: Piecing together the picture. Doctoral dissertation, University of Portsmouth.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. (pp. 1–16). Chichester: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Toliver, R. (1997). The interrogator: The story of Hans-Joachim Scharff—master interrogator of the Luftwaffe. Atglen: Schiffer Military History.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsan-Chang, L., & Chih-Hung, S. (2013). A study of police interrogation practice in Taiwan. Paper presented at the Asian Conference of Criminal and Police Psychology, Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Amelsvoort, A., Rispens, I., & Grolman, H. (2005). Handleiding Verhoor (Revised editions in 2006, 2007, 2010 & 2012). Amsterdam: Stapel & De Koning.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Adel, H. (1997). Handleiding Verhoor. ’s-Gravenhage: Vuga.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhallen, M., & Vervaeke, G. (2014). Between investigator and suspect: The role of the working alliance in investigative interviewing. In R. Bull (Ed.), Investigative interviewing. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Sleen, J. (2009). A structured model for investigative interviewing of suspects. In R. Bull., T. Valentine, & T. Williamson (Eds.), Handbook of psychology of investigative interviewing. (pp. 35–52). Chichester: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2012b). How do interviewers attempt to overcome suspects’ denials? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Derby, Derby, UK

    Ray Bull

Authors
  1. Ray Bull
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ray Bull .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Derby, Derby, United Kingdom

    Ray Bull

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bull, R. (2014). When in Interviews to Disclose Information to Suspects and to Challenge Them?. In: Bull, R. (eds) Investigative Interviewing. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9642-7_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation