14 Mai 2017
The goal of this study was to examine the communication strategies currently being used during the interrogation process as well as the key personality constructs that are integral to successful interrogation. A multi- method approach was used. Interviews with ten officers with interrogation experience were conducted in addition to collecting information via a web- based questionnaire (N=2. The findings suggest an overwhelming need to .
Artisteer - web design generator for Joomla templates, Wordpress themes, Drupal themes, Blogger templates and DNN skins.
Cognitive: Interrogation: Cognitive: Verbal: Verbal: Interrogation: Complexity: Effectiveness: Complexity: Aggressiveness: Aggressiveness: Effectiveness. Auteur: Jane Austen: Pays Angleterre: Genre: Roman: Version originale; Langue: Anglais: Titre: Persuasion:
Additional strategies include the use of theme development, modeling interviews some ways but diverging in other necessary ways, and critical emphasis about on- the- job training with this specific job role. Results suggest a positive relationship between cognitive complexity and communication competence; verbal aggressiveness and cognitive complexity; and negative relationships between cognitive verbal aggressiveness and communication competence. Explanations for the findings and results are provided in addition to the mention of the study. As a result, we rely on law enforcement officials to temper crime and to protect and serve the citizens of our communities. A major factor in the reduction of crime and determining guilt is suspect interrogation.
I am now talking to women everywhere I go and gaining the confidence that I can be an Alpha Male without hesitation. Where I used to be a wallflower at a. We value excellent academic writing and strive to deliver outstanding customer service each and every time you place an order. We write essays, research papers, term papers, course works, reviews, theses and more, so our main. Study online flashcards and notes for Thank You for Arguing What Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion.pdf including This book has been optimized for viewing at a monitor setting of.
Communication is key to the art of interrogation. In recent years, particular interrogation tactics have come under tremendous scrutiny in terms of humane treatment of people—especially with some unorthodox tactics used in investigating terrorists. My goal in researching this topic is to discover what communication strategies are commonly used for suspect interrogation, which tactics are suggested by law enforcement to elicit the best results, and what the relationship is between those results and particular personality traits.
More specifically, how are verbal aggressiveness and cognitive complexity related to the communication outcomes associated with interrogation? As a result, I plan on examining the tactics used and the unique differences between interrogators to include a) how the interviewer best knows which tactic to employ and b) if these tactics are perceived as successful.
Interviewing and interrogation certainly have similar aspects to one another. They are both simple ways of obtaining information, involve . However, there are distinct differences between the two. There are several interrogation tactics, which are: direct confrontation, theme development, dealing with resistance, alternative questions, and developing details (Blair, 4. This study will seek to answer which tactics are used in certain situations.
Cognitive complexity and verbal aggressiveness will also be looked at to determine whether the two have a relationship to successful interrogations. Since there is a direct relationship between cognitive complexity and communication effectiveness (Delia), it can be expected that officers with a high level of cognitive complexity are successful at interrogating. However, many people assume that officers that interrogate are verbally aggressive, yet people who are especially aggressive have lower communication skills (Infante, Trebing, Shepherd & Seeds, 1. In addition to the literature based on interrogation, interviewing, and communication, I also relied on information from three communication studies courses; the courses I used to inform my study include Theories of Human Communication, Legal Communication, and Persuasion. My theoretical frame is cognitive complexity, a major component of Jessie Delia. I used information regarding questioning and interviews from Legal Coommunication. From the Persuasion, I extracted basic ideas of how persuasion relates to communication in general, and more specifically I related it to interrogation.
One of the officers I interviewed even said, . But instead of selling a junky car to someone, we have to sell the idea that confessing is the best thing to do. But unlike traditional interviews, interrogations are often perceived as much more hostile, antagonistic, and perhaps to some degree, even frightening. They begin much like traditional interviews. The basic goal is to obtain and secure information and they do this by having the interviewer ask questions and use purposeful conversation (Aubry & Caputo, 1. According to Hamilton (2.
While interrogations and interviews both use strategic communication, it is important to understand how interviews and interrogations are similar andhow they are different. Although an interview can generally be determined successful if theinformation needed is acquired, an interrogation is deemed successful if the suspect confesses to the crime (and/or leaks information about another perpetrator) and/or provides more details about the crime itself.
While they have a common goal, interviews and interrogations differ in their communication tactics: .
Persons involved in interviews typically schedule a set amount of time for the interview. Interviewers do not hurry, but often operate in an efficient manner. Interrogations cannot always be predicted.
They are based on an unhurried interview that will ultimately lead to the best results. Interrogations are hardly viewed as an efficient kind of communication process and can also last several hours or longer (Inbau, 1. Interviewers rely on informative tactics that will allow the interviewee to reveal pertinent information in an effort to be viewed as a desirable hire. In fact, interviewees are often more persuasive than interviewers. Conversely, interrogators rely heavily on persuasive tactics to get the suspect to confess. While interrogating a suspect that seems guilty, interrogators try to persuade the suspect that confessing is the best thing to do. Interrogators do this by altering the suspect.
Like persuasion, interrogations also involve the formation, development, and alteration of attitudes. Persuasion in an interrogation can be difficult because the suspect has a strong belief in maintaining that they are innocent and this belief may be difficult to change. The interrogator must have a basic knowledge of human personality and psychology in order to persuade effectively. Interrogations often rely on the persuasive tactic of a fear- arousing appeal and attempt to reassure the suspect that confessing is the best possible solution (Aubry & Caputo, 1. Persuasion focuses are different in interrogations than they are in interviews.
In an interview, the interviewer is the target of persuasion and the interviewee attempts to persuade the interviewer that they are qualified, reliable, and desirable, but in an interrogation, the suspect is the target of persuasion.
There are several different interrogation tactics used by law enforcement. These are direct confrontation, theme development, dealing with resistance, alternative questions, and developing details (Blair, 2. All the tactics can be applied in any one interrogation. However, depending on the context and the suspect, certain tactics may be more applicable, and others may not be used at all.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, direct confrontation occurs at the beginning the interrogation. A direct positive confrontation occurs.
This is especially important at the beginning because the investigator must initially control and direct the conversation (Boetig, 2. Direct confrontation occurs when the investigator suggests they know that the suspect has committed the crime. The approach that most commonly follows direct confrontation is theme development.
Theme development is the second technique or tactic used by law enforcement agencies.It is defined as offering the suspect a moral excuse and the investigator presents the suspect with reasons to confess by offering possible rationalizations, projections of blame, or even minimizations.
The first way is offering a rationalization. Rationalization is where the interrogator makes the crime seem socially acceptable and even reasonable given the circumstances because the rewards outweighed the consequences. For example, investigators may rationalize a bank robbery by telling the suspect that given the state of the economy, other people are making this same decision because of their financial situations. The second kind of theme development, projections of blame, relocates or transfers some of the blame to someone or something else entirely—such as the victim or society. In other words, the interrogator will construct a message that suggests that some . For example, if a woman is suspected of vandalizing her boyfriend.
The third way a theme is developed is through the use of minimization. This occurs when the investigator works to diminish the severity or shocking nature of the crime. Given the last example of vandalism, the interrogator can minimize the woman. These themes are based on theories of criminology (Boetig, 2. Theme development occurs in one of three ways—a rationalization theme, a projection of blame theme, or a minimization theme. This can be an effective communication strategy because it utilizes moral and ethical justifications for the crimes in hopes the suspect will process and accept these justifications, which will ultimately lead to the truth.
The third technique is known as dealing with resistance.
Resistance is the refusal to comply and it is viewed as a strategy because the interrogator is bound to experience resistance and must know how to overcome it. There are specific ways of dealing with resistance (Inbau, Reid, Buckley, & Jayne, 2. According to Inbau et al.
They suggest the use of domination; this is where the investigator does not allow the suspect to talk. They continue to talk, talk over, and talk louder than the suspect. They also suggest interrogators attempt to draw an objection from the suspect and use it to form a new theme. An objection is a reason why the accusation of guilt is incorrect. For example, if a suspect accused of armed robbery objects to owning a gun, this fact should be pulled out to form a new theme.
/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.over-blog.com%2Ft%2Fcedistic%2Fcamera.png)