Science-Based Interviewing & Interrogation

Science-Based Interviewing: What the Field Data Actually Shows

Two independent field-validation studies—real suspect interviews, law enforcement investigators, across four states, a federal agency, and two major cities police agencies—tested science-based interviewing against how interviews are traditionally conducted. Not role-plays. Not self-reports. Real cases.

What they found:

🔬 Investigators who used science-based tactics got more cooperation, more information disclosed, and more admissions and confessions—the effect runs through the tactics themselves, which is exactly why the skills have to be trained, not just described.

🔬 Accusatorial tactics backfired. They produced more counter-interrogation resistance from suspects and less cooperation. The legacy approach isn't just less effective—it actively arms the person across the table.

🔬 Trained tactic use was still elevated in real interviews conducted three to nine months after the course.