Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Interview and Interrogation Methods Effects on Confession Accuracy

  • Christopher E. KellyEmail author
  • Allison D. Redlich
  • Jacqueline R. Evans
  • Christian A. Meissner
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_434



The interviewing and interrogation of suspects is important to securing convictions against the guilty and freeing the wrongly accused. There are two general methods of questioning suspects: information gathering and accusatorial. The information-gathering approach, used in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, and elsewhere, is characterized by rapport building, truth seeking, and listening. The accusatorial approach, used primarily in the United States and Canada, is characterized by accusation, confrontation, psychological manipulation, and the disallowing of denials. Academics and practitioners hotly debate which method is more effective, particularly in light of increased awareness of the problems with false confessions. Two separate but related meta-analyses were conducted to address this question. The first relied upon data from five observational field studies and the second from 12...

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

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Bull R, Soukara S (2010) What really happens in police interviews. In: Lassiter GD, Meissner CA (eds) Police interrogations and false confessions: current research, practice, and policy recommendations. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Cox DR (1970) Analysis of binary data. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Educing information. Interrogation: Science and Art. Intelligence Science Board, Phase 1 Report (2006). National Defense Intelligence College, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Gudjonsson GH (2003) The psychology of interrogations and confessions. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  5. Inbau FE, Reid JE, Buckley JP, Jayne BC (2001) Criminal interrogation and confessions, 4th edn. Aspen, GaithersbergGoogle Scholar
  6. Justice BP, Bhatt S, Brandon SE, Kleinman SM (2009) Army field manual 2-22.3 interrogation methods: A science-based review. Unpublished manuscriptGoogle Scholar
  7. Kassin SM, Drizin S, Grisso T, Gudjonsson G, Leo RA, Redlich AD (2010) APLS-approved white paper, police-induced confessions: risk factors and recommendations. Law Hum Behav. doi:10.1007/s10979-009-9188-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kassin SM, Gudjonsson GH (2004) The psychology of confessions: a review of the literature and issues. Psychol Sci Public Interest 5:33–67Google Scholar
  9. Kassin SM, Kiechel KL (1996) The social psychology of false confessions: compliance, internalization, and confabulation. Psychol Sci 7:125–128Google Scholar
  10. Lassiter GD, Meissner CA (2010) Police interrogations and false confessions: current research, practice, and policy recommendations. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Lipsey MW, Wilson DB (2001) Practical meta-analysis. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  12. Meissner CA, Redlich AD, Bhatt S, Brandon S (2011) Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions. Final report to the campbell collaboration, crime and justice group. http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/
  13. Russano MB, Meissner CA, Narchet FM, Kassin SM (2005) Investigating true and false confessions within a novel experimental paradigm. Psychol Sci 16:481–486Google Scholar
  14. Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Chacón-Moscoso S (2003) Effect-size indices for dichotomized outcomes in meta-analysis. Psychol Methods 8(4):448–467Google Scholar
  15. Schollum M (2005) Investigative interviewing: the literature. New Zealand Police Department. Retrieved 15 Jan 2006. http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2005/investigative-interviewing/investigative-interviewing.pdf
  16. Williamson T (2006) Investigative interviewing: rights, research, and regulation. Willan Publishing, DevonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher E. Kelly
    • 1
    Email author
  • Allison D. Redlich
    • 1
  • Jacqueline R. Evans
    • 2
  • Christian A. Meissner
    • 3
  1. 1.University at Albany, State University of New YorkAlbanyUSA
  2. 2.The University of Texas at TylerTylerUSA
  3. 3.The University of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA