Science-Based Interviewing puts investigators back in control by grounding interviews in peer-reviewed research rather than intuition, tradition, or pseudoscientific lie detection. This article shows where to find open-access research on interviewing, interrogation, memory, deception, and false confessions—allowing investigators to read the evidence for themselves, verify claims, reduce investigative risk, and strengthen decision-making through transparent, evidence-based pra

Science-Based Interviewing focuses on gathering accurate, unbiased information—but some common questions quietly sabotage that goal. Self-handicapping questions like “Were you a witness?” embed assumptions that cause people to self-exclude, cutting off valuable information before it emerges. This article explains how these questions harm investigations, why they persist, and how open-ended, information-generating prompts protect investigative integrity.

Modern interview and interrogation training is failing because it still relies on accusatory methods, lie detection myths, and a confession-first mindset. Decades of research now show Science-Based Interviewing gathers more information, strengthens case integrity, reduces bias, and even increases confessions. It’s time to replace broken tools with evidence-based skills that actually uncover the truth.

If I could go back and talk to my younger self as a new police officer, I'd have some words of advice: Slow down. Listen more. Police work is all about the interview (especially then!). When I started out, I wanted to chase and catch the bad guys. I wanted to clean up the mean streets and I was lucky enough to work in the same Patrol Bureau where I grew up. That meant something to me. If I am able to apprehend sufficient offenders and bring them into the county jail, I will h

Science-Based Interviewing (SBI) must come before Artificial Intelligence (AI) in policing. Pseudoscientific lie detection and accusatory tactics feed garbage into investigations, and AI will only amplify those errors. Evidence-based SBI—rapport, active listening, open-ended questions—produces reliable, information-rich statements. That’s the data AI can actually use to strengthen cases and build trust in the information age of policing.

Interviewing can be one of the most intimidating parts of an investigator’s job, especially for those who are new to their role. Whether...

How can we tell whether a child died from co-sleeping or if she was smothered intentionally by a parent who had tired of her crying? How...

Yesterday, I attended something called a Care Team Meeting. The weather was frigid and snowy, more suited to February in Minnesota than...

The Importance of Preparation in Interview & Interrogation Conducting a successful interview or interrogation requires more than just...

Literature’s greatest detectives remind us that effective investigations rely on science and intuition, not tricks or pseudoscience.

Miranda v. Arizona reshaped modern interrogation by recognizing that custodial questioning creates psychological pressure that can compel statements. The Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment requires suspects to be advised of their right to remain silent and to an attorney before custodial interrogation. These protections safeguard voluntary statements, reduce coercion, and preserve the integrity and reliability of evidence obtained during interviews.

Frederick Porter Wensley’s career at Scotland Yard offers enduring lessons for modern Criminal Investigation. Long before formal models or buzzwords, Wensley understood that information is the lifeblood of every case. His success came from patience, careful listening, and respect for evidence, not tricks or rigid systems. That same philosophy underpins today’s science-based approach: gather reliable information, avoid contamination, and seek understanding before conclusions.

Red teaming is a structured approach investigators use to challenge assumptions, counter confirmation bias, and strengthen investigative decision-making. Rather than reinforcing early conclusions, red teaming introduces disciplined skepticism, helping teams test working theories, evaluate evidence more critically, and explore alternative explanations. When applied intentionally, red teaming improves accuracy, reduces risk, and supports more defensible investigative outcomes.

Investigators rely on memory as evidence, yet memory is vulnerable to distortion through post-event information and poorly framed questions. Research on the misinformation effect shows how leading questions, social influence, and timing can alter recall. Science-Based Interviewing (SBI) protects memory integrity by prioritizing early interviews, witness separation, free narratives, and the strategic use of evidence to gather accurate, reliable statement evidence.

Active listening is a core skill taught across all IXI negotiation courses and a foundational component of science-based interviewing. In crisis negotiations, it is a life-preserving tool that helps negotiators identify emotions, values, and unmet needs behind demands. By reflecting feelings and summarizing concerns, conversations shift from confrontation to problem-solving without coercion.

The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) serves as a critical interagency effort within the U.S. government, bringing together intelligence professionals, operational interrogators, and academic researchers to advance the science and practice of interrogation. Established in 2009 under the direction of Barack Obama, the HIG was created to ensure that interrogation practices are effective, ethical, and grounded in empirical research. Since its creation, the HIG has su

Interviewing is data collection. In an era where Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning are revolutionizing various sectors,...

In law enforcement and investigative work, acronyms are more than shorthand—they shape how information is shared, interpreted, and acted upon. From incident command to interviewing and evidence handling, understanding common law enforcement acronyms helps reduce miscommunication, improve clarity, and support sound decision-making. This reference breaks down frequently used terms to help investigators, analysts, and leaders better navigate the complex language that influences

False confessions persist because flawed assumptions go unchallenged. This article uses red teaming to critically test the belief that innocent people never confess, exposing how coercive tactics, bias, and psychological vulnerability undermine investigations. Grounded in research and real-world cases, it shows how Science-Based Interviewing (SBI) and key assumption checks strengthen critical thinking, protect memory and decision-making, and produce more reliable, ethical inv

Confirmation bias is predictable—but not unavoidable. Left unchecked, it distorts interviews, weakens investigations, and jeopardizes outcomes. Science-Based Interviewing (SBI) offers a practical path forward by using red teaming to challenge assumptions, test hypotheses, and counter confirmation bias and other cognitive errors. Through structured critical thinking, SBI strengthens objectivity, protects case integrity, and supports ethical, evidence-driven decision-making.