Humane Interrogation Strategies Are Associated With Confessions, Cooperation, and Disclosure: Evidence From a Field Study of Incarcerated Individuals in the United States

• Published date: 01 June 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241232068
• Author: Talley Bettens,Hayley M. D. Cleary,Ray Bull
• Date: 01 June 2024
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2024, Vol. 51, No. 6, June 2024, 949 –969.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241232068

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2024 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

949

HUMANE INTERROGATION STRATEGIES ARE

ASSOCIATED WITH CONFESSIONS,

COOPERATION, AND DISCLOSURE

Evidence From a Field Study of Incarcerated

Individuals in the United States

TALLEY BETTENS

George Mason University

HAYLEY M. D. CLEARY

Virginia Commonwealth University

RAY BULL

University of Derby

The techniques used to interrogate individuals suspected of a crime can profoundly impact their decisions to confess, cooper-

ate, or disclose information. Research using different methods suggests that two prevailing interrogation approaches—accu-

satorial and information-gathering—differentially impact interrogation outcomes. However, confession, cooperation, and

information disclosure are ultimately the suspected person’s decision, yet few studies directly examine their perspectives

about how interrogation techniques affect their decisions, and none examine a U.S. sample. This study assessed how inter-

rogation strategies characterized by humanity, rapport, confrontation, and dominance/control predicted interrogation out-

comes in a sample of 249 individuals incarcerated in two U.S. jails. Respondents who reported experiencing humane

strategies were more likely to confess, cooperate completely, and disclose incriminating information. Dominance/control-

oriented strategies predicted partial confession (but not cooperation or disclosure), and rapport-based and confrontational

techniques did not predict outcomes. Findings highlight humane interrogation strategies as likely the most productive strate-

gies to adopt in criminal interrogations.

Keywords: interrogation; confession; cooperation; disclosure; suspect

Research on the methods used in criminal interrogations has flourished in the past few

decades, primarily in response to growing awareness of false confessions that can lead

to wrongful convictions (Kassin et al., 2010). In many countries including the United States,

confession evidence carries immense weight; its presence virtually guarantees conviction at

AUTHORS’ NOTE: We have no known conflict of interest to disclose. Correspondence concerning this article

should be addressed to Talley Bettens, Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University,

4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA; e-mail: tbettens@gmu.edu.

1232068CJBXXX10.1177/00938548241232068Criminal Justice and BehaviorBettens et al. /

research-article2024

950 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

trial (Appleby et al., 2013) or by guilty plea (Redlich et al., 2018), even if the confession

was the product of a coercive interrogation (Shaked-Schroer et al., 2015) or contradicted by

exculpatory evidence (Appleby & Kassin, 2016). Consequently, scholars have devoted con-

siderable attention to identifying and classifying interrogation techniques and their impact

on confession rates.

Interrogation techniques are typically classified into broad dichotomies based on their

intended outcome (e.g., minimization vs. maximization; dominance vs. humanity, Kelly

et al., 2013), with a particular emphasis on accusatorial versus information-gathering

approaches. Accusatorial approaches—still dominant in many parts of the United States—

are guilt-presumptive, confrontational techniques aimed at obtaining confessions (i.e.,

admissions of guilt to police during interrogation; suspected persons may confess to all or

some aspects of a crime, for example, Redlich et al., 2018). In contrast, information-gather-

ing approaches, initially developed in the United Kingdom and used in a variety of coun-

tries, prioritize building rapport and utilizing humane, ethical techniques to enhance

cooperation (i.e., willingness to engage with interviewers and aid in investigations) and

information disclosure (i.e., the timely disclosure of crime-relevant and truthful information

to police; see, generally, Bull & Rachlew, 2020). Compared with accusatorial approaches,

information-gathering approaches tend to produce more diagnostic confession outcomes

(Meissner et al., 2014) and result in more cooperation and disclosure of crime-relevant

information from guilty people (e.g., Evans et al., 2013), leading both scholars and practi-

tioners to advocate for a shift away from accusatorial interrogations. Indeed, an interna-

tional committee of experts drafted and recently published the “universal protocol” (i.e.,

worldwide guidance) advocating for non-coercive interviewing methods (Mendez, 2021).

Research on the classification of interrogations in the United States and their impacts on

interrogation outcomes has been limited in two ways. First, it is predominantly based on

officers’ self-reported use of techniques (e.g., Cleary & Warner, 2016). The limited number

of studies from the perspective of the target of the interrogation—that is, the individual

suspected of a crime—were pioneered two decades ago by Holmberg and Christianson (see

Bull & Rachlew, 2020). Understanding a suspected person’s point of view is vital since they

ultimately decide whether to confess, cooperate, or disclose information. Previous research

has shown that suspected persons’ experiences and perceptions do influence their (self-

reported) interrogation-related decisions (e.g., Goodman-Delahunty et al., 2014; Holmberg

& Christianson, 2002; Kebbell et al., 2008, 2010). However, these studies have been almost

exclusive to samples outside of the United States (but see Cleary & Bull, 2019, 2021),

where interrogation methods may differ from those used within the United States (Miller

et al., 2018).

Second, existing work is limited in that most studies focus on confessions as the sole

outcome of interest (e.g., Cleary & Bull, 2021). While obtaining confessions is the primary

goal of accusatorial interrogations (e.g., Inbau et al., 2013), some police in the United States

have begun to use a range of techniques from both accusatorial and information-gathering

approaches (Cleary & Warner, 2016). This suggests a gradual shift toward more informa-

tion-gathering techniques, where cooperation and disclosure from persons suspected of a

crime are prioritized over confessions (Meissner et al., 2017). There is growing recognition

that cooperation and voluntary disclosure from persons suspected of a crime are central to

successful interviews, and researchers can support the shift toward evidence-based investi-

gative interviewing by measuring cooperation and disclosure as key outcome variables.