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.

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...

Success in high-stakes situations, such as criminal cases, compliance interviews, or HR investigations, requires more than just asking the right questions. It’s about asking the right questions for the right reasons, in the right way. That requires more than instinct or experience; it calls for strategic preparation. Integrating red teaming , setting clear interview objectives , and crafting a strategic questioning plan  can elevate any investigation from routine to remarkab

In science-based interviewing, mastering the art of questioning is not just a skill—it's a necessity. How do you ensure that the...

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.

In the world of law enforcement, corporate investigations, and criminal investigations, the skills and strategies employed during interviews and interrogations are crucial for gathering reliable information and solving cases. This article presents an extensive glossary of terms, jargon, acronyms, and slang commonly used in these critical processes. It’s important to note that while some terms describe effective and ethically sound techniques, such as Science-Based Interviewin

Mastering the art of ethical interrogation requires a blend of skill, strategy, and dumping of antiquated interrogation techniques....

Are you ready to take your interviewing skills to the next level? After all, interviews are the most important part of any investigation....

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

Open-ended questions are foundational to science-based interviewing because they elicit free narratives that reveal unknown unknowns—information investigators could not anticipate or know to ask about in advance. These narratives allow investigators to be surprised, opening new lines of inquiry, better follow-up questions, and more case-relevant data than closed or leading questions ever produce.