Interrogations

The four main themes of the videos were weakest link, lie detection, empathy and deception. All four of these categories have various techniques which allow detectives to get to a psychological stand point with the alleged suspect and possibly get a confession.

One of the most surprising things I found while watching the interrogations of suspects was that the investigators could use false information to try to illicit a response. This was under the deception category, and allowed officers to trick the suspect into providing a confession. During one of the techniques in deception, the detective informs the suspect that they were seen, had tests to prove, etc in order to get inside the suspects head and make them think that they already know they committed the crime. They get most of this information from tips, and use it to play into the suspects mind.If the investigator is correct when trying to deceive the suspect, the suspect will usually provide a confession. While this may seem like trickery, the investigators assume that if a suspect is innocent they will not admit to something they did not do.

Empathy is all about making the suspect feel comfortable. Investigators will do whatever they have to do in order to make the suspect feel that they are on their side. If a suspect requests to be only questioned by a certain sex, or race, the investigators provide an interrogator who fits the credentials requested. Another tactic that is used in interrogations is making the suspect feel that they are real person. To do this, the detective must develop some level of connection with the suspect, and make the suspect comfortable enough to answer questions, and even confide in them.

One thing that investigators use to their advantage is finding out if the suspect is a weak link or not. In cases of abuse, many suspects fear for their lives, and are hesitant to reveal any information that could possibly endager them. The investigators inform the abused suspect that they are safe, making them feel more comfortable about the questioning. Eventually in a weak link case, the suspect breaks down and provides information once they feel that their safety and well being is not in jeopardy. This technique involves emotional psychology as well as cognitive psychology.

Another interesting method I found was lie detection. Most people think that getting tested for lies goes through a polygraph. Most investigators use a Computer Voice Stress Analysis to analyze whether a suspect is lying or not. The computer measures the AM and the FM in the suspects voice, and it is the most accurate way to tell if a person is lying. With this method, investigators have concrete proof of the suspect lying. Just telling the suspect that they are lying is usually not enough, and the interrogator uses the proof of the test to back up their accusations. Once a suspect is caught lying, more information, or even a confession follows.

I was not aware how detailed an interrogation is, and how many different methods police use in order to obtain one. The system is complex and there are different things to try based on the suspect. With things like computer tests, or even the deception technique, the investigator is almost sure to get some information, or in the best case scenario, a confession, out of the process.

Although the purpose of interrogating someone is to get information for legal purposes, more often than not, psychological tactics are the strategies that lead to this outcome. Some of these psychological approaches are methods that parents use to get their kids to fess up to something, others involve more complex forms of manipulation or reverse psychology that can be controversial whether or not interrogators should be allowed to apply to their cases.

The four videos showed 4 techniques: weakest link, empathy, lie detectors, and deception.

These first two techniques relate to aspects of social psychology, where the interrogator develops a rapport with the person they are talking with. The weakest link video showed how investigators single out one person involved by making them believe that sharing information is their only beneficial option if not their only option. This relates to the section on the book that discusses loss of control & social isolation. Both sources explain that it's important for the victim/suspect to feel like the investigators are on their side and will not misuse the information they chose to share. The video about empathy revealed how interrogators try to get down on their level and show understanding. Making it seem like the person's actions were justifiable, the interrogator changes the focus from guilt and punishment & implies that if there are consequences, they will be lenient. This connects to information from the book in the section about exculpatory scenarios.

The other two techniques in the videos - lie detectors and deception - go hand in hand and are more controversial. Both are strikingly useful, but that doesn't mean that they are ethical. Why should people being questioned be expected to be open & honest, while the very people sitting in the same room asking them questions aren't held to those same standards? A key part to consider in this situation is that they are dealing with potential criminals who could be very dangerous, so getting the truth out, no matter how they get it, is what they see as the most important thing. The problem comes in when these psychological strategies backfire & result in false information or false confessions, which is surprisingly common. Sometimes guilty people crack under the pressures placed upon them in the interrogation room, but sometimes innocent people resort to confessing something they didn't do, or even worse, are influenced so much that the police reshape their memory and they actually come to believe they did it.

Something that surprised me was the good cop/bad cop method. You hear about it or see it in movies, but I never realized it could be an actual strategy. This psychological tactic is under the branch of social psychology.

Biopsychology is also involved when literally analyzing body language, movement and sounds. I already knew that a person's body language can say a lot more than their words, but something new I learned from the video was the AM/FM sounds of the voice. A kind of lie detector picks up on those tones transmitted in their voice & can help differentiate true information verses fabricated lies.

terms: reverse psychology, manipulation, weakest link, loss of control, social isolation, exculpatory scenarios, social psychology, false confessions, memory, biopsychology, body language

I really enjoyed going to the website to watch some interrogations and take a few quizzes. There were only four videos on the interrogations playlist, though. The titles of these four videos were: Weakest Link, Empathy, Lie Detector, and Deception. All of them gave me some insight into what an actual interrogation would look like. For example, the Weakest Link clip showed an investigator interrogating a woman about committing a crime. He told her that he could place her at the scene of the crime, and then she ended up giving him information pretty willingly without much effort on the investigator’s part. Once he got her to start talking, she just kept going. In the Empathy clip, it discussed how an investigator kind of has to make a connection with the suspect or perpetrator that is being interrogated. They have to empathize with them to make them feel like they can disclose information about whatever crime they committed. The Lie Detector clip showed that if an investigator uses an inanimate object such as a polygraph machine and has proof to back up that the person being interrogated is lying, then that person is more likely to come forth and make a confession because they feel as though they are already caught in the crime. The final clip, Deception, discussed how sometimes investigators have to lie to the person being interrogated and manipulate certain things to get a truthful response or confession out of them. All of these videos basically solidified what I had learned in this week’s reading, and it definitely made the information stick in my mind a lot better.

Besides watching video clips on the link, I also took a few quizzes on the interrogation process, different serial killers, and more. The quizzes were very informative, and they made me realize that I do not know as much about legal processes and systems as I think I do or as I should. The quizzes were set up in a great way, and I felt as though I learned a lot by going through and taking a few of them.

All in all, I really learned a lot from visiting this particular website. I learned that although investigators may have to scheme a little bit and be somewhat deceptive and manipulative during interrogations, they are only doing so because they want a true confession. The investigators in the videos seemed like genuinely nice people, so it made me realize that not all investigators are mean and use torture to get confessions out of people. I also learned that there is a test that an investigator can make a suspect take that is called a computerized voice stress analyzer. It is more accurate than the polygraph, and it cannot be beat. Apparently it works off the AM and FM in your voice, and when someone is lying, the FM in their voice dissipates. This was completely new information to me, and I thought that it was pretty cool and kind of scary. Something else that I learned from the website was that Charles Manson was convicted of certain crimes purely due to conspiracy and being connected to the people who committed them. I learned this by taking a quiz on him, and I gained a lot of information about him that I had not previously known.

The thing that surprised me the most from visiting this website was that there are so many methods that investigators use to get inside peoples’ heads. I could not believe that they go through so much trouble just to try to get a confession from someone. The crazy thing, though, is that it seemed as though a lot of the techniques used really work. This is good in the sense that we are able to get criminals to confess to their crimes. This could be bad, though, in the sense that maybe investigators are eliciting false confessions from innocent people.

Psychology has so much to do with the entire interrogation process. Investigators have to use different psychological techniques and tactics, such as good cop/bad cop, deception, empathy, and lie detection to get inside the suspect’s head. Investigators can also use social isolation and reverse psychology to get the person to tell them what they want to hear. Their goal is to attain a confession, and hopefully not a false confession. By using these different psychological techniques, someone might crack under the pressure and admit to something that they did not even do. Essentially, investigators are taking on the role of psychologists during the interrogation session because of the fact that they have to relate to the person, converse with them in a way that will elicit a confession, and then finally successfully attain that confession and use it to take action against the perpetrator and figure things out for the victim.

I was happy with this assignment and hope that there are more like it in the future! The interactive quizzes really helped me learn little facts that I had not known before, and the video clips were very informative as well.

Terms: interrogation, weakest link, empathy, lie detector, deception, investigator, crime scene, suspect, perpetrator, polygraph test, confession, manipulation, serial killers, computerized voice stress analyzer, false confession, psychology, good cop/bad cop, social isolation, reverse psychology, victim

The first thing that really surprised me was how lightly these investigators were taking the fact that they have to lie to many people who are being interregated to get them to tell the truth. It was interesting to me that that whole interrogation situation is essentially a power struggle. I mean if the suspect that is being interrogated would have lied then the police would have them come under serious consequences but the cops are able to lie at their disposal, whenever they feel fit to get the answers that they need, even if it means asking leading questions or putting false information into a suspects head. This is something that I think needs to be reevaluated as far as forensics goes because although it is an often successful way to get someone to talk it also could have a lot of unintended consequences.
The next thing that I saw from the website went kind of along with the first, and that is that people lie…..A LOT. Everyone lies even when they are faced with cold hard evidence that what they are saying is false. People will stick to their guns and protect whatever they need to mostly because I think they are afraid of what could happen if they slip up or start to talk about something that they weren’t supposed to. I kind of noticed from watching the interrogation rooms that people can go in with one of two attitudes (subject to change over the course of the interrogation) and that is that either they come in as absolutely terrified or they are coming in strong and hard-headed, determined that the cops are not going to get any help from them and they are not going to be the one to rat on anyone to the cops. I believe this is something that the cops then have to assess to continue their interrogation with that in mind and follow some techniques they have been shown to deal with the person’s attitude.
I think a lot of what goes on in those interrogation videos was really interesting. The women in the first video was legitimately scared that the person the cops were after could easily get to her, going through all sorts of barriers if she talked about who he was or what he did. This constitutes a blantant lack of safety that many people feel with the cops now. The more criminals there continue to be in this world means less secure feeling Americans and a shortage of cops. This could contribute to the continued feeling that “I am going to have to fend for myself” and that the cops won’t help.
When taking the quizzes on the website I started with the serial killer quiz and did surprisingly poorly, not to mention I guessed on a lot of the questions. It kind of surprised me how prolific these serial killers are and how the website sometimes referred to them as famous. I have learned through different sources that that is sometimes what the serial killers want, is to be recognized and to recognize the serial killer as famous is something that, in my opinion, demeans their victims in a sense and if the killer is one that has a name or that everyone knows, people tend to forget about the victims and some even may idolize the killer. I was surprised at the word famous in the quiz.
I played the 911 quiz and learned a lot about how the dispatchers at the other end of the 911 calls have a very important duty to the people who are in trouble. One question was about how a 911 dispatcher was sued after she hung up the phone after there was no response on the other end of the line. A women ended up dying because she didn’t send out emergency help. There was also a question about a problem that came up when an infant boy didn’t receive help for his mom because they had an internet based phone service that didn’t have their current address. Leading the police to go to the wrong home and the mother dying. These consequences affect many people’s lives and it just kind of goes to show that everyone in the process of an emergency needs to be trained well and know the correct responses to a situation or it could prove fatal for any number of people.
This website related very closely to what were talking about in class as well as things mentioned in the textbook. The textbook talked very closely about bias in a case and how that can play a major role. These interrogations have the possibility of being very biased and very leading for the victims because the cop can actually talk to and see the suspect. So having this suspect in mind as a perpetrator for a crime could create a confirmation bias where the cop only sees the answer that he wants to out of the suspect or may think the suspect is lying.
Another thing related to psychology was the thought of leading questions in an interrogation. The feeling that I got from the videos is that the cops were kind of allowed, to a certain extent, to do whatever they needed to to get answers out of the person being interrogated. This could also mean leading them on or asking false questions to get a sense of whether the person is lying or not. As we have already discussed, leading questions can lead to a person misremembering things and possibly alter the course of the case.

Terms: Interrogated, suspect, unintended consequences, evidence, leading questions, serial killers, victim, bias, confirmation bias, misremembering

Investigators can be pretty tricky during interrogations in order to get information out of suspects and witnesses. By using different techniques, investigators are able to collect specific information that can lead them in the correct direction in an investigation, as well as hopefully attain a confession from a suspect. These four techniques (weak link, empathy, lie detection, deception), are all unique in their own way and are very helpful to an investigation when utilized correctly.

By using the weakest link technique, investigators are able to manipulate the people they are interrogating by making people believe that compliance is the most beneficial option for them. These people are usually associated with a crime and scared to cooperate. Investigators try to make them feel safe and that it is okay for them to confess their knowledge. By using the empathy technique, investigators try their best to make the person being questioned feel comfortable around them. They want to make them feel like their actions are understandable and shed the light away from punishment and more on the vital information that is important to the case in question. By using the lie-detector technique, investigators are able to prove to the suspect that he or she is lying. It goes beyond what the investigator thinks and has an inanimate object to show proof that the person in question is not telling the whole truth. By using the deception technique, investigators are able to lie to the suspect in order to prompt them to give up information. They can lie and say anything from that they had the suspect under surveillance to positive test results that place them at the scene of the crime. I feel as if this technique is an ethical form of interrogation, even if it gets a lot of criticism, because the ultimate goal is to gather enough information (and perhaps a confession) in order to bring about justice. After watching these videos and taking the quiz, I realized that I know a fair amount about interrogations, but I definitely have a lot more to learn when it comes to details.

The biggest surprises came from the quizzes that I took. I have talked about torture techniques in previous classes, but I forgot that they actually existed. I was very taken back when I learned that waterboarding is legal. Honestly, I feel like we can use other techniques that aren’t so agonizing to get information from people. I was also surprised that so much information is revealed by eye movements. If you are remembering something, you look to the right. If someone is acting like they are remembering something but are actually making it up, investigators will be able to tell by the direction their eyes. I was also surprised that the newer form of lie-detection is used through a voice analyzer. It is so crazy to see where technology has come these days, especially in the crime field.

Psychology is used throughout the interrogation process. Cognitive psychology is used when trying to deceive the suspect, for they must mentally construct the lie they are about to use. Interrogators play on emotions a lot, especially with using empathy and the weakest link techniques. Social psychology is used in all techniques because it is important to be able to understand different types of people and their personalities, as well as how to handle them all in a way to get information.

In conclusion, I found this assignment very interesting. I was able to shed new light on what I thought I already knew about interrogations as well as learn new information. I think that psychology plays a huge part in interrogations because they have to use different techniques to influence suspects to get a confession. However, psychology is most important in the sense that they have to manipulate the suspect’s mind and study body language in order to ensure that the information that they get is correct. False confessions are much too common this day in age for a multitude of reasons.

Terms: Interrogation, investigation, suspect, witness, emotion, cognitive psych, social psych, confession, body language

Honestly I knew about all of the techniques used in the videos because I have seen many of these in other real investigations and I know of personally these techniques as well from one of my family members having to deal with them. Though I knew of these techniques one thing I did not know of was the voice analyzer for another form of lie detection.

The main videos that were available to watch upon opening the website were weakest link, lie detection, empathy and deception. These video links showed just a few of the techniques that investigators use to get information from a suspect. I also watched the video intimidation video which was available after watching the four other videos

Weakest link involved investigators trying to get to a soft spot in the suspect for example when the investigator was connecting men as being bad with the woman who was afraid of men which helped her confide with the investigator a name of the criminal. Lie detection basically almost everyone should know about this as a technique involving some form of tool that scans and processes many physical characteristics tied to lying that helps investigators gauge what they may already suspect or not suspect. Empathy is another more common technique seen in many cases or TV shows that many people should know as the good cop. The good cop tries connecting with a suspect by telling them they are not in trouble, we are not going to drill you, and so on. Deception is probably a much more difficult technique to pick up on if one does not already know about it or if information on the case is not available to the viewer. Deception technique is done exactly how one would think investigators can make calculated lies to trick a suspect to thinking cops know more than they believed.

Out of the five videos I watched four of them, weakest link, empathy, deception and intimidation, are psychological techniques that usually deal with a person’s emotions which eventually leads up to a suspect confessing. The example given for weakest link was of the woman who was afraid of men and the investigators used that fear. Empathy makes the suspect feel as if they can tell the right investigator what really happened. Deception is either twisting the truth or totally lying about information to make a suspect to feel possibly fear in that the cops already know everything when they don’t.

Terms: investigators, suspect, lie detection, empathy, deception, emotions, and intimidation

I found this website to be pretty interesting.
From my background in communication studies, I found that the techniques of establishing empathy were the most interesting and informative. Establishing empathy in an interrogation means to create a connection and comfort with the suspect, either in the form of body language, reducing stress by creating a safe zone, being calm and inquisitive, and creating open communication. In social psychology and interpersonal communication studies, this technique reminds me of the Social Penetration Theory, where relationships build from a superficial layer into a deeper, more intimate relationship through stages/layers. Not saying that the investigators have relationships with the suspect, but in order to build rapport with the suspect, the investigator must create a comfort with the suspect in order to have the suspect give more in depth information. The investigator must break the barriers that are in the way of communicating with the suspect to get to the core of what they are trying to find; the confession. By creating empathy and an interpersonal connection, suspects can feel more comfortable, therefor resulting in information to help aid the investigation and even confessions.
I was surprised to find that investigators lie themselves in order to probe information and confessions. Information is power and the suspect gives the investigator credibility because of their supposed knowledge. However, this can be a problem when a investigator probes and deceives for answers so much that a suspect may be tormented into giving a false confession.
After reviewing the "Wrongly Accused" quiz, I found it so sad that 16 of 215 people on the Innocence Project served on death row and that some courts refuse to consider newly discovered DNA evidence once trial has ended.
So what does psychology have to do with all of this? Psychology plays into the techniques of interrogating by creating rapport with the suspect by lowering stress levels and getting on the same level as the suspect. Psychology also works with interrogation techniques by creating stress with polygraphs and other lie detection techniques such as false tests, eye movements, and body language. The interrogator really has to get into the mind of the suspect to judge how to treat the interrogation. Ness stated that, "It is human nature to want to be free from stress." People who commit crimes can have guilt or regret. If an investigator can create a moment where the stress of guilt can be relieved, the success rate for truthfulness rises, just like a counselor relieving someone's anxiety through counseling sessions.
I found that the website reinforced what the textbook already mentioned. I also think that law enforcement would benefit from using the correct techniques and allowing an environment for stress to escape from the suspect, rather than forcing a false confession and having the innocent incarcerated for faulty interrogations.

Terms used: interrogation, empathy, body language, rapport, social penetration theory, DNA evidence, deception, suspect, lie detector, polygraph test, incarcerated, anxiety, stress, guilt

Police procedurals are among my favorite shows, but I wished they played it closer to the truth then they actually do. Investigation and interrogation is fascinating in it's own right. I understand why they spice things up by putting in cops with behavioral issues or who are unprofessional in one way, shape, or another. There isn't any real need to sensationalize it as much as there is to edit out the parts that aren't as interesting.

Any good interrogation is about pressure. Dealing with the police or any like authority figure just by virtue of their station has kind of a passive pressure. Most people will be forthcoming with mundane information that is non-threatening to their continued way of life. Individuals who are opposed to the police or police forces, professional criminals, gang members, anti-authoritarian individuals, have a higher threshold against this sort of pressure but even so, with mundane information, there's no real compelling reason to hide it so there still isn't a lot of pressure generally necessary to get this sort of information.

When the situation involves something that might actually be incriminating, this threshold is naturally higher across the board. The interrogation then becomes about applying pressure to the right spot to overcome this resistance. Witnesses with no ties aren't that hard to pressure unless they have a feeling of personal danger, the interrogation should take a turn toward soothing and assuaging these fears, in effect lowering their resistance toward coming forth with the information.

The threshold increases as the personal connection between the witness and the perpetrator increases. Even people who are normally law-abiding usually feel compelled to cover up for those they care about. Appeals to morality are a good angle. Fear can be useful, whether it is fear of repercussions from the police or maybe even fear of the perp. Anything that would serve to drive a wedge between the two becomes useful. The less connected they feel, the lower the threshold.

When the person being interrogated is actually the perp, law-abiding citizens are the wild card. For crimes of passion, accidents, anything that lacks pre-meditation, on average it isn't hard to pressure them into talking. Guilt plays a large part in this effect and anything that works with their typically already sizeable guilt presses against their threshold from the other side.

Premeditation from a law-abiding citizen, by definition is unusual but it usually results from prolonged emotions, typically rooted in anger in one form or another. If you can figure out what triggered the anger, the best angle is to bring as much of it to bare as possible. That anger can easily overwhelm everything and anything else.

Gang members work a little differently and an interrogator should be on the lookout for misinformation on the principle of opposition. One reason attributed to the formation of gangs is a lack of a feeling of belonging within the family. If we accept this, we accept the idea that the gang serves as a surrogate family with all the requisite closeness and implicit loyalty. If the gangs are actually successfully filling that gap, it can be incredibly difficult to break those bonds.

When dealing with gang members, there are four circumstances that need to be addressed. One, where most of the gang is unaware of the gang member(s) committing any crime at that time. If there is a reason to suspect that particular gang, you can fish for mundane information in an effort to gather enough information to narrow down the suspect pool. If you get really lucky, a piece of information that looks mundane from the outside of the investigation when one has no knowledge of a crime occurring might even be handed right to an interrogator.

The second circumstance is when the majority of the gang knows. If you can't rally enough physical evidence alone that the DA feels confident in pursuing a case, and an interrogation is necessary this circumstance is tricky. There are three plays that tend to work. One, seeking out a weak link. Someone who is scared, disgusted or alarmed at what happened will be more forthcoming than one with no negative emotional reaction. Two, focus on the inherent fear that the connections brought about by gang membership are as weak as their real family, or weaker.

The idea of a family is one bound by blood is something that exists in human minds across cultures. It represents what is supposed to be the strongest ties. It is why basic training camps for militaries and groups like them often use that word. They are attempting to force bonding of a like scale through shared trauma that can only be conquered by leaning on the other individuals. Gangs tend to be somewhat similar, but it is as each situation comes rather than a continuous twelve week trial.

An interrogator can play on the fear that gang ties are weak, or that the other members of the surrogate family will be disloyal. This play to drive the gang apart is typically an effective one because nobody sees as much weakness and imperfection as family does.If an individual actually has a poor family situation, which are not always the case, then trust issues are not unusual. Even if the individual does not have trust issues, there is still a fear in others and in the unknown that are not hard to play.

The third circumstance is when a majority of the gang is involved in the crime. This is the most difficult situation to deal with because it implies a complex crime with a significant magnitude. The entire gang is intimately invested in getting caught. The best play, almost the only play is to pray on the fear of getting caught with a member who had a lesser role and hoping you can talk the DA into cutting a deal. Apart from that, you pretty much have to hope for an informant to come forward or for an overly ambitious gang member to roll over on their own.

The forth circumstance is when the individual in question committed a crime but not the crime the interrogators are seeking information on. It is the rarest circumstance but one that has come up. It is tricky because the gang member can not come forth with an alibi that is real and that is impossible to disprove other than one that will likewise cause investigation. There isn't any great angle to play for this one, because the interrogators are off track.

There are three further important things to note. One, gang members don't necessarily commit crimes. By and large, they are just people in a gang. Most crimes are performed by solitary individuals and not actually gang activity even if it negatively reflects on the gang. It isn't necessarily a reflection on the gang but the circumstances surrounding the individual. Gangs can generate good and can have positive influences, not just bad. This isn't to say there is no bad, or that most gangs don't tend toward bad. Gang violence is an issue because of the ties of the gang, because they do care and suffer grief when someone they care is taken from them. Look deep when you think about the next question. Could you shoot someone who intentionally, maliciously killed a brother or a sister or a nephew, or a son away from you?

Two, it is more important to apply the right kind of pressure rather than the amount. If you continually increase the amount of pressure, just like torture, you are liable to get misinformation, a false confession or just plain provably wrong statements. If an interrogator gets a DA to act on provably wrong statements it makes the defense's case easier. It can be a huge waste of time. What I presented are only guidelines, a series of approaches, but each interrogation should adapt to the subject and seek to play off of them.

Three, Information from interrogations should be to fill in gaps and to track down hard physical evidence. It is and should never be considered the end all be all.

The series of videos all depicted different aspects of interrogations. The main four types that were covered were lie detection, weakest link, empathy, and deception. I do not agree with all of the techniques but they are proven to illicit a confession.

Lie detection is often construed as a stressful and lengthy process that requires a polygraph machine. The fact of the matter is that most lie detection is not done with a polygraph, rather it is done with a Computer Voice Stress Analysis. This software measures both the AM and FM in a suspects voice in order to determine if they are lying. Once a person has been identified as lying they will become more cooperative to the investigation.

The weakest link method relies very heavily on social psychology in that the interrogator has to build a relationship with the suspect. After establishing a relationship they begin to convince the suspect that the safest and only way out is to confess everything they know about the crime. This technique does not work on every suspect and that is part of why it is called the weakest link. Police will search for who they believe can be easiest to manipulate and get to confess.

Empathy is a pretty straightforward concept. It is as it sounds, the investigator acts empathetic to the criminal. They begin to talk of how what happened was understandable and the only real option. The goal of this is to lull the suspect into a confession by comforting and reassuring them.

Deception is the area in which I find the greatest ethical dilemma. This technique allows investigators to confront the suspect with false evidence and identifications in order to convince the person that they have already been proven to be guilty. Deception can have many issues. In cases where a suspect is easily manipulated or suffers from events which can cause memory loss these lies could illicit a false confession. It can do the same for those who wish for everything just to end. Confessions provide a means to an end.

These methods are all designed to get a suspect to confess to a crime. Sometimes these are false confessions that allow the actual criminal to run free. That is not the only issue I have with these methods. In order to obtain crucial and factual information suspects should not be deceived or abused. These methods can have a lot of negative consequences both legally and psychologically. Being force-fed misinformation can easily taint all memory, recall, and perception; this can naturally lead to problems with the accuracy of a confession. The police often rely heavily on social psychology to manipulate those who they have already deemed guilty. In doing so they can also confront those who are actually innocent, that could then change ones schema for police, forever tainting it. I feel that good police work should not employ the use of deception, rather the use of skill and fact.

Terms: Lie detection, weakest link, empathy, deception, computer voice stress analysis, confession, social psych, evidence, memory, recall, perception

I really liked watching the four clips of Real Investigations. The clips were Weakest Link, Empathy, Lie Detector, and Deception. After watching these I learned a variety of things including that investigations have a variety of psychological aspects to them.

As I was watching the first clip, Weakest Link, I noticed that the tactic was to reel her in by making her nervous and turn her against guys to make a confession. The sheriff was basically manipulating her to confess for the sake of the benefits it would bring. This psychological aspect would be social psychology because they are deprived of being influenced by others and the only people there was her and the sheriff making her feel anxious and off-balance.

The second clip, Empathy, I guess would tie in with developmental psychology, because it is important to make a "bond" with the suspect. It is very important to make the initial connection and make them feel as comfortable as you can. Even if it means switching the investigator because they feel more of connection with a different person of the same sex or race.

The third clip and the fourth clip, Lie Detector and Deception, go hand in hand because they use both use lying as a weapon of choice. The lie detector records what they say and tells him/her that they are lying based on fm of the voice. Deception is about the investigator lying to the suspect to get a confession out. This would probably be cognitive psychology because you would try to mentally psych the suspect out and catch them in lies or get the truth. One thing that did surprise me was about the lie detector and people tampering with it. That makes you look really guilty or that your hiding something from the cops.

I loved watching these clips because all the things I learned where very interesting to me.

The overall aspect of interrogations and confessions is interesting to me. Almost everything I heard and read was new knowledge to me, unless it was repeated from the chapter in the text. The four types of interrogation shown were as follows; weakest link,empathy, lie detector, and deception. Each technique displays many aspects of psychology.

Weakest link is when the police find the weakest individual to interrogate in hopes of discovering names and new information. In the case shown they pin pointed a women and played up that men are the enemy. Because they did not give much background on the case, the only focus was on the way she was questioned. Empathy used to create a bond with the suspect while questioning. The bond helps instill relatedness and some social needs. The next form was the use of a polygraph. One thing that I found interesting about this clip in the video was the amount that people try to tamper with this test in pure desperation. I also am curious about the accuracy of this test. The deception is the last technique that they show. Deception is when they tell the person that there is already information present. All of the interrogation techniques use a psychological aspect to further advance. All of the human needs come into play for interrogation. The main needs that are evolved would be; autonomy, competence, relatedness, achievement, affiliation, and power. By understanding an individuals needs the interrogation process can be altered.I would be further interested in the other types of interrogation that involve physiological needs. Some aspects of information during the process surprised me. The use of false information to receive a confession truly made me dumbfounded. The statistics of false confessions was high and due to the interrogation process. Not saying that I do not agree with the use of things necessary to receive a confession, however, we need to strive for a correct confession.

Key terms: interrogations, confessions, weakest link, empathy, lie detector, deception, suspect, needs,

After watching all the videos of investigation techniques and taking a couple quizzes, I actually learned quite a bit. I realized that I actually didn't know as much as I thought about interrogations in general.
The four different videos that I watched provided insight to what investigators do to try to get confessions and other information out of suspects and other involved criminals. The first video explained the weakest link technique. The investigator's in this video explained that in order to get some people to comply, they must make them feel as if they are the weakest link. They have to make them feel as if providing information to the police is the only good option for them. Any other option could potentially be devastating. They also must make sure the criminal believes the cop is on their side. They have to build up trust in these individuals in most cases in order to illicit any information from them.
The second video was talking about empathy. Empathy is a very useful tactic that I wasn't aware was used as much as it is. Cops can use empathy to gain trust with the criminals. They use this to make the criminal believe that they are on their level and also make it seem like the cop is on their side as well. Doing this is going to make the criminal more comfortable with the interrogator, which eventually leads to them providing more information to the police. One of the main things stressed was that making the criminal feel comfortable is one of the most important things you can do right off the bat to make them respond to stimuli as you want them to.
The things I learned in the third video about lie detectors were good to know! They use what they call inanimate objects to reinforce what they are saying. The cop in the video stated that he could tell the suspect that he knew he was lying and he might not believe them, but when you take an inanimate object that's confirming what the officer said, the criminal might start to believe that the cop is on to something.
The last video was about deception. This video was also very informative because I knew that cops did this, but I didn't know it happened as often as it does. This is a very useful tactic because the criminal doesn't really know that you are deceiving them. They use this tactic to get individuals to think that the interrogator actually knows more about the situation than they actually do in hopes of getting the criminal to agree with it or provide a confession.

Terms: interrogations, investigator, illicit, empathy, stimuli,

Because one of the primary functions of interrogations is to elicit confessions, and confessions are the leading persuasive piece of evidence in trials, studying and understanding interrogations is highly important for all individuals. Though I had heard of some of the techniques, I learned quite a bit and was even shocked by some of the information on the website.
Several specific types of interrogation techniques were highlighted. I was surprised to learn that investigators could blatantly lie to individuals during questioning. This interrogation technique, also called “deception,” does not infringe on the suspect’s rights. One police officer explained that deception often gets suspects to think that the police know more than the police actually do; therefore, the investigators can uncover additional information. This type of interrogation makes the suspect feel like the investigator is everywhere and knows everything which seriously erodes the suspect’s resolve or confidence. Thus, the investigator makes the suspect feel isolated. This plays on an important aspect of social psychology: the more alone a person feels, the more likely that person will acquiesce and confess what he or she knows.
Another method used in interrogations is a lie detector. I was quite surprised to learn that some persons try to dismantle or break the machine while the investigators are out of the room. One police officer stated that persons had destroyed cords and poked holes in some of the tubes. I also thought that the voice stress detectors were a neat invention. The voice stress detectors can identify the physical changes in a person’s voice when that person is lying. In other words, this device recognizes physical manifestations of psychological phenomena. This is part of behavioral psychology.
A third technique identified on the website is “weakest link”. In this video, the investigator tells the woman that it will only benefit her if she tells the police what she knows. The investigator then pits her against her accomplice and says that she was only being used by him. Eventually the woman agrees with the officer’s statements and begins telling him about “Diablo”. This technique utilizes social psychology by making the suspect feel like he or she no longer has persons supporting them. Again, isolation is an important aspect of this interrogation technique.
Empathizing with the suspect is also a useful method. An investigator in one video said that one has to get on the same level as the suspect and has to connect with the suspect. Once a connection has been made, then the suspect is more likely to cooperate. Sometimes, several investigators will talk to the suspect until one investigator makes a connection. The investigator which spoke about this method said that egos had to be “checked at the door”. Additionally, the investigator stressed that one should not over-empathize as this comes across as fake; as a result, the investigator can no longer establish a bond, or rapport, with the suspect. I found this technique particularly interesting because it goes against the typical “give ‘em the third degree” attitude which is seen in some movies. This technique particularly plays on the elements of social psychology. The investigator manipulates how humans connect with each other in order to get the witness to confess.
The “good/bad cop” routine was also explained in a video. This routine again plays on the psychological state of the suspect. The “bad” cop is confrontational and threatening to the suspect while the “good” cop empathizes some with the individual. Essentially, the “bad” cop wears the suspect down while the “good” cop gains the trust of the individual. The suspect will usually confess to the “good” cop if the suspect does confess at all. This method utilizes social psychology.
Basically, all of these methods of interrogation place the suspect under some type of psychological stress which impels the suspect to share information. Investigators can use behavioral psychology to discover when the witness is lying. For example, persons look to their right when remembering something. Additionally, body language can provide a lot of unstated answers. For example, the woman suspect in one of the videos had her arms crossed; this signifies that she was not willing to cooperate with the officers. Information gleaned from social psychology is used to make the suspect more likely to confess. To make the witness feel uncomfortable, he or she is questioned alone and not allowed to speak with other witnesses/suspects at any time.
I was really surprised to learn that false confessions happen frequently—especially from youthful suspects—when suspects are interrogated. The supplemental reading stated that false confessions, even when the witness pleads not guilty later, immensely influence a jury. Additionally, 31% of false confessions come from minors. This number is shocking because only 16% of suspects are minors. This discrepancy can be explained by developmental psychology. The book states that the main reason youths are more likely to falsely confess is because their cognitive development is not complete. Therefore, youth are more susceptible to suggested ideas and more likely to cave under pressure.
An interesting fact that I learned from the interrogation quiz and the book is that 80% of persons waive their Miranda rights. This shows another important aspect of social psychology in that we, as a culture, have become desensitized by the large number of waivers we sign on the internet and whiling filing paperwork. As a society, it seems that we believe asking for an attorney or being silent are admissions of guilt.
Terms:Interrogation, deception, isolation, lie detector, voice stress detector, behavioral psychology, weakest link, social psychology, empathizing, rapport, good cop bad cop, psychological stress, body language, cognitive development, developmental psychology, Miranda rights, admission of guilt, bond, false confessions

In researching the interrogation process it was interesting to learn some of the psychological tactics that police officers use to elicit confessions as well as persuade suspects to surrender information. I enjoyed watching the video clips of real investigations because they give direct insight into the thought processes of the suspect as well as the manipulation of that suspect by the police.

The first video was called the Weakest Link. It has this name because the the police use a tactic in which they go after the weakest member of a criminal group in order to get confessions as well as information. In the video the police caused the female to have a strong fear response and also encouraged her to feel that men are the enemy. They also were able to convince her that, since they could place her at the scene of the crime, that her most beneficial option would be to cooperate and provide information.This led her to divulge information about the identity of the male individual who was responsible for her involvement in the crime.

The second video clip is called Empathy. This is a tactic that does not often appear in media depictions of police interrogations. It is just as the name implies, when the investigator is empathetic towards a suspect in order to have them open up and provide information. The goal is to make the suspect as comfortable as possible, and giving him or her reassurance. With this tactic, the investigator gains the suspect's trust and gives them the impression of being on their side.

Another clip i enjoyed involved the classic good cop/ bad cop routine. This strategy is a great example of social psychological manipulation. It is kind of a hybrid between the two aforementioned strategies for interrogation. One officer plays the role of being threatening and intimidating, causing the suspect to feel afraid and uncomfortable. The other officer is relatively kind and empathetic to the suspect. This combination of techniques is extra effective as it combines two already effective strategies and juxtaposes them in such a a way so that they amplify each other.

Terms: psychological, elicit, confession, suspect, investigation, fear response, criminal, empathy, investigator, social psychology,

The videos on the interrogation talked about four aspects related to interrogations. They are weakest link, empathy, lie detector, and deception. Interrogators use these techniques, as well as others, to get information or a confession out of a person. An interrogation is a like a psychological chess game.
The first video was titled "Weakest Link". In this video, two interrogators were talking to a woman. They made her feel that she was in a situation where it would only benefit her to tell the interrogators everything they knew. The interrogators used a theme to make the other men the enemies. This had to do with psychology because reversed the role of the men she was with and made them feel like the enemy and he was the good guy. By making her more comfortable, she was willing to give up the information that they wanted. This is like counseling where the therapist tries to establish a trustful relationship with the client.
The next video was titled "Empathy". Empathy is something that interrogators need to be successful in getting information from a suspect. They try not to come to strong, they try to be like their friend when they talk to someone. This helps the person feel comfortable and therefore willing to get more information. With empathy, this helps the interrogator connect with the suspect. This is like cognitive psychology. With empathy, you are trying to make the person feel secure, safe, and emotionally calm, that way they will feel safe telling the interrogator more information.
The next video was titled "Lie Detector". They used a machine that takes recordings of the persons voice. When the person lies, a certain aspect of their voice disappears. They can use this to question suspects and know if they are lying or not. Interrogators use this as a psychological weapon. It makes the suspect more likely to tell the truth because they have a machine that can tell the interrogators if they are lying or not. Also, I believe there are other telltale signs that give away if a person is lying or not. This would involve perception. Such is if a person looks away, or touches a certain part of their body after they tell the lie.
The next video was titled "Deception". I think that deception is all psychological. It is making the person think one way to work to your advantage. Such a cop telling the suspect that they know a lot more than the suspect thinks, when in fact they do not. When the interrogators say something that they do not know about the suspect, but it is actually truthful, the suspect will agree.
I took the interrogation quiz. I got 9 out of the 10 correct. I was surprised by the amount I got right. Most of the answers I knew or had an idea, but a few of them were complete guesses that I got right. I feel that watching the videos before I took the quiz helped me out a bit. I thought about the interrogation styles used in T.V. shows and thought they were kinda accurate in portraying the real world interrogation (the techniques).
I thought this was a good website on interrogation. It gave a lot of good information about interrogating. I learned that just because you confess to something, depending on the circumstances, that confession may not hold up. What surprised me are the different "torture" techniques that can be used with water.