Cited by 53Deception detection and forensic psychologyTorture, Ethics, and LawCriminal Law and Evidence

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accusatorial and information-gathering interview and interrogation methods: a multi-country comparison

Abstract

Suspect interviewing and interrogation practices have been studied in many different countries, including those in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. These studies have produced useful and interesting findings, while also leaving an opening for future inquiry. Specifically, previous research has noted that we might expect interrogation and interviewing practices to vary among different countries or regions, due to distinct approaches to suspect questioning. However, to our knowledge, few previous studies have examined the comparative use of tactics, techniques, and procedures employed to elicit confessions and information from criminal suspects across multiple countries. In the present study, using a consistent survey, we contrasted the interviewing and interrogation practices of 185 practitioners from America, Canada, and Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. In large part, we found that American and Canadian interrogators were similar to one another, and conformed to an accusatorial approach (in both deception detection and questioning techniques). In contrast, interviewers from Europe, Australia, and New Zealand conformed more to an information-gathering approach.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/1068316x.2018.1467909

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • More research and policy are being directed at less coercive models for police interrogation in the United States and in a range of jurisdictions around the world.

    “However, more research and policy are being directed at considering less coercive models for police interrogation in the United States and in a range of jurisdictions around the world (see Miller et al. 2018).”

    From Wrongful Convictions (2020) · cites this paper as Miller et al. 2018

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. 10.1002/acp.1408 · DOI
  2. 10.1080/1068316X.2015.1114113 · DOI
  3. 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1037/12085-005 · DOI
  5. Cain A., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 71
  6. Cassell P. G., 1996, UCLA Law Review, 43, 839
  7. Clarke C., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 101
  8. 10.1177/1098611107309116 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/07418820903218966 · DOI
  10. Dixon D., 2007, Interrogating images: Audio-visually recorded police questioning of suspects
  11. Drizin S. a., 2004, North Caroline Law Review, 82, 891
  12. 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.03.002 · DOI
  13. Fahsing I. A., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 180
  14. Feld B. C., 2006, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97, 219
  15. Feld B. C., 2013, Kids, cops, and interrogation: Inside the interrogation room
  16. 10.1177/0022022105282295 · DOI
  17. 10.1080/10439463.2014.942848 · DOI
  18. 10.1002/acp.3087 · DOI
  19. Goodman-Delahunty J., 2014, The Journal of the Institute of Justice & International Studies, 13, 65
  20. Griffiths A., 2006, Investigative interviewing: Rights, research and regulation, 167
  21. Gudjonsson G. H., 2003, The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook, 7
  22. 10.1002/acp.1491 · DOI
  23. 10.1002/bsl.470 · DOI
  24. Inbau F. E., 2013, Criminal interrogation and confessions
  25. 10.1348/135532509X449361 · DOI
  26. 10.1007/s10979-009-9188-6 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/s10979-006-9073-5 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1007/s10979-005-2416-9 · DOI
  29. Kelly C. E., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 255
  30. 10.1037/lhb0000172 · DOI
  31. 10.1037/a0030310 · DOI
  32. 10.1037/law0000034 · DOI
  33. 10.1177/0093854809335142 · DOI
  34. 10.1002/bsl.871 · DOI
  35. 10.2307/1144028 · DOI
  36. 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00584.x · DOI
  37. Makles A., 2012, The Stata Journal, 12, 347, 10.1177/1536867X1201200213 · DOI
  38. 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121657 · DOI
  39. 10.1007/s11292-014-9207-6 · DOI
  40. 10.1177/0887403416687359 · DOI
  41. 10.1080/10683169608409795 · DOI
  42. 10.1002/acp.3040 · DOI
  43. Redlich A. D., 2009, Psychological science in the courtroom: Consensus and controversy, 124
  44. 10.1002/acp.3069 · DOI
  45. 10.1002/jip.48 · DOI
  46. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 2014, Committee study of the central intelligence agency’s detention and interrogation program
  47. 10.1037/a0016962 · DOI
  48. 10.3138/cjccj.52.2.215 · DOI
  49. Snook B., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 229
  50. 10.1080/10683160802201827 · DOI
  51. 10.1037/12085-008 · DOI
  52. van Beek M., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects, 157
  53. Vrij A., 2008, Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities
  54. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.02.014 · DOI
  55. 10.1080/1068316X.2013.854791 · DOI
  56. 10.1348/135532506X157179 · DOI
  57. 10.1007/s11896-015-9174-5 · DOI
  58. Walsh D. W., 2016, International developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: Volume 2, suspects
  59. Walters S. B., 2003, Principles of kinesic interview and interrogation

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Miller, J. C., Redlich, A. D., & Kelly, C. E.
Affiliations
  • University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
  • Saint Joseph's University (US)
Corresponding author
Miller, Jeaneé C.
Venue
Psychology, Crime & Law
Published
2018-05-02
Volume
24
Issue
9
Pages
935-956
ISSN
  • 1068-316X (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-2744
OpenAlex
W2802343414
Cited by
53
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 1
FWCI
7.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychology Crime and Law (publishedVersion)
Funders
High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Torture, Ethics, and Law
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Law and Evidence
Keywords
police interrogation, suspect interviewing, deception detection, questioning strategies, tactics, techniques, and procedures, cross-national comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review