For decades, investigators have been taught to search for signs of deception. But research increasingly points toward a better question: what makes a statement reliable? Truth spotting shifts the focus from behavioral guesswork to information that can be examined, tested, and verified.
One simple word can dramatically influence cooperation. Research on the power of “because” shows how giving a reason—even a brief one—can increase compliance and improve the way requests are received.
Reciprocity in the Interview Room: Give Something Before You Ask for Something by Stan B. Walters - The Lie Guy® ORCID 0009-0002-1063-0519 Cooperation Often Begins Before the First Important Question Interviewers naturally enter an interview thinking about what they [...]
Interview questions do more than recover information—they can influence what a person later remembers. Learn how memory contamination can affect victims, witnesses, and subjects, and why protecting memory should be treated as seriously as protecting physical evidence.
Anger can quickly derail an investigative interview when the interviewer becomes more focused on being right than gathering reliable information. Learn how managing emotional reactions, maintaining dialogue, and choosing response over confrontation can protect both the interview and its outcome.
Anger is not evidence of deception or honesty. Learn why angry subjects can become “intellectually deaf,” and why recognizing the difference between reacting and responding is critical to productive investigative interviews.
Narrative and accusatory interviewing are more than different techniques—they represent two fundamentally different investigative philosophies. One is designed to gather and evaluate information. The other often begins with the objective of obtaining admissions or confessions. Those choices influence the quantity, quality, and reliability of the evidence investigators ultimately present in court.
Most investigations begin with the crime. The better question is: When did the crime really begin? Long before the act itself, offenders often progress through a series of decisions involving distorted thinking, planning, preparation, and commitment. Understanding that sequence can change how investigators conduct interviews—and how they build stronger cases.
Many investigators believe talking demonstrates control. In reality, excessive talking suppresses the subject’s narrative, increases the risk of contamination, and reduces statement reliability. Learn why disciplined silence is one of the most powerful—and overlooked—skills in investigative interviewing.
Unsupported ideas can spread through interview and interrogation courses simply because they are repeated. This article examines how echo chamber instruction takes hold, why repetition is mistaken for proof, and the risks it creates for investigators.