Interview Confidence: How Science-Based Interviewing Builds Better Investigators

Interviewing can be one of the most intimidating parts of an investigator’s job, especially for those who are new to their role. Whether you're a detective working a violent crime or a

Boosting Interview Confidence Through Science-Based Interviewing (SBI) Techniques

compliance officer leading a workplace inquiry, it’s normal to feel unsure. The goal of any interview should be to uncover the truth, not to trap someone with a clever question or rely on “gotcha” moments, manipulation, or so-called lie detection. While those tactics may appear appealing in marketing, they ultimately fail when examined closely. Great interviewers are loaded to bear with evidence-based methods, sound questioning strategies, and rapport-building techniques that create the foundation for actual truth to surface. This is the core of science-based interviewing (SBI), an interviewing approach that replaces accusatory/legacy tactics and improvisation with planning and questioning strategies. These help investigators across sectors approach every conversation with clarity, confidence, and purpose.

How can I become more confident in interviews as a new investigator?

The answer isn’t found in quick cutting wit, trick questions, lie wizardry or theming. Interviewing confidence comes from knowing how to gather accurate information and a lot of it. This is one of the most common and most important questions asked by new detectives, corporate investigators, loss prevention, and compliance professionals. Whether you're conducting a witness interview in a homicide case, investigating workplace misconduct, or leading a sensitive debrief in a fraud inquiry, the interview pressure is real. Interviews feel high-stakes because they are. They can make or break cases, shape reputations, influence decision makers, and define outcomes. That’s why building interview confidence is essential and why we must challenge where people think that confidence comes from.

People often assume that confident interviewers are just "good talkers," possessing charisma, quick wit, or a smooth tongue. In reality, this belief does more harm than good. Talkers can, if they don't switch to listening, dominate conversations, miss key disclosures, or unintentionally steer the interview in unproductive directions. Worse, they can confuse performance with progress. The truth is, talking more means you’re learning less.

I’ve read commentary and seen slides from commanders of major investigative sections, including homicide, who teach that the best interviewers and interrogators should become great talkers. They emphasize storytelling skills, engaging small talk, and a knack for gab as if these qualities were the benchmark for sound investigative work. However, statement evidence is derived solely from one source: listening. If you’re doing most of the talking, you’re not gathering evidence; you’re giving a speech, your opinion. The most critical details in a case cannot be discovered when you're speaking.

And your prosecutors reviewing cases know it. They can tell whether you conducted a quality interview or interrogation without even reading a single word, just by looking at the transcript. If the longest paragraphs belong to you, the investigator, and your subject’s responses are shorter, that’s a problem. A strong interview transcript shows the subject, whether victim, witness, or suspect, doing most of the talking. You should be setting up the conditions, asking great open-ended questions, and letting the information come to you. Transcripts are a simple yet powerful indicator: who’s doing the talking versus who’s doing the listening?

Interviewing is not a performance; it’s a process. A process to gather more and more accurate information. Real confidence doesn’t come from winging it. It comes with knowing what you’re doing and why. You are here to gather accurate information because more information is better than less, every single time. When a new investigator steps into the room with a plan, a clear objectives, and a deliberate communication strategy, they don’t need to, nor should they rely on, "being a good talker."

What should I prepare before conducting an investigative interview?

Confidence in interviewing starts with preparation. Before an interview ever begins, a science-based interviewer considers key questions:

• What information do I currently have?

• What do I think happened or assume happened?

  • Challenge these assumptions/ideas (red teaming)

  • Play the devil's advocate (red teaming)

• What information that I have is corroborated?

• What evidence do I have?

• What type of person am I speaking with?

Science-based interviewing emphasizes pre-interview planning and red teaming. Investigators learn how to set objectives, build evidence disclosure strategies (like the Strategic Use of Evidence or SUE technique), and create environments that support cooperation and disclosure. With Science-Based Interviewing (SBI), the interviewer avoids poor strategies like confession seeking, "just winging it," or "catching someone in a lie," particularly by relying on pseudoscience (no one testifies to that garbage). Confident interviewers and interrogators approach interviews to gather information methodically and effectively with a pre-planned questioning strategy and interview objectives.

Before conducting any interview, it’s important to identify specific interview objectives based on the investigations, witnesses, or known facts. The following are examples of potential objectives an interviewer may pursue to clarify timelines, access, relationships, and actions taken:

• Whereabouts during key timeframes (e.g., around 3:00 p.m.)

• Detailed job duties or assignments for the day

• Who had possession of or access to their:

  • Vehicle

  • Cell phone

• Relationships or associations with involved persons (victim, suspect, coworkers, etc.)

• Mode or route of travel to and from the location (driving, public transportation)

• Certain elements of a crime for criminal investigations

• Clothing or description of suspect or other persons

• Communication (calls, texts, emails) during the relevant timeframe

• Case, environment, or investigation-specific details

One powerful way to build better interview objectives and, in turn, more interview confidence is through red teaming. Red teaming helps you challenge your assumptions, expand your investigative thinking, and generate alternative possibilities and objectives. It’s not just about ruling things in; it’s also about ruling out other possibilities to build a stronger case.

For example, in a hypothetical internal theft case, your experience and investigative pattern recognition may point to a particular employee as the likely subject. Their access level, timing, and opportunities all align with what you’ve seen in similar cases. At this point, you have one subject of interest. But this is where red teaming becomes essential for pre-planning interviews. Before moving forward, ask: What am I assuming? Have I fully ruled out vendor involvement, customer interference, or the possibility of an accomplice? Could someone be manipulating the suspect, or is this person being framed? These challenges help expand your interview objectives beyond simply testing guilt (confession seeking). Now, your objectives include inquiring about the employee’s access and routine, identifying opportunities for collusion, understanding their knowledge of inventory control procedures, professional relationships, and exploring who else may have had access during the relevant timeframe. Red teaming helps you create a more balanced and objective interview strategy, one that seeks information, not just confessions. Rather than anchoring your questioning objectives to one conclusion, you’re setting the stage to gather context, alternative explanations, and pursue the truth, wherever it leads.

How do I know if my interview questions are effective?

Confidence also comes from asking the right types of questions, rather than just any questions. New investigators often fear becoming "flustered" or not knowing what questions to ask. But powerful interviews are never built on dozens of rapid-fire closed-ended questions. Usually when you see this occur, planning was nonexistent or was poorly executed. Instead, during planning, interviewers structure their open-ended, free narrative-eliciting questions around preplanned interview objectives, lighting the fuse for the interviewee to provide a lot of information. Great questions will always lead to the discovery of additional objectives or topics of interest related to your investigation. TThese questions encourage narratives rather than just yes-or-no answers. They set the stage for other fundamental interviewing techniques such as active listening and rapport. In short, they create space for truth to emerge.

One proven method for building these kinds of open-ended questions is TEDS: Tell, Explain, Describe, and Show. TEDS questions invite the subject to give a free narrative account of events in their own words. For example: “Tell me what happened after you arrived,” or “Describe what the normal process looks like.” These aren’t accidental conversation starters; they’re intentional open-ended question prompts designed to uncover timelines, behavior, and context. TEDS questions reduce pressure on the interviewer, minimize contamination, and allow the interviewer to utilize active listening. When used correctly, they shift the focus from interrogation to information gathering, the hallmark of science-based interviewing.

For HR professionals, corporate investigators, and compliance experts, this approach is equally valuable. Many interviewers should be aware of potential legal risks, emotional conversations, or internal politics. But those who prepare with purpose, ask the right questions, and listen will always perform better, no matter the industry. The bottom line is this: confidence doesn't come from how much you talk. It comes from how well you plan, how well you listen, and how clearly you understand your role.

How do I build rapport in an investigative interview?

One of the most overlooked, yet most powerful, ways to build rapport in an investigative interview is through active listening techniques. Confident interviewers listen far more than they speak. This isn’t passive silence; it’s active, intentional engagement. When you listen with purpose, you signal to the interviewee that their account matters. You reduce resistance, lower defensiveness, and invite cooperation with the interviewer. Active listening not only strengthens rapport, it also leads to more detailed, accurate, and reliable case relevant information. Every pause you allow, every paraphrase, and every emotional label you apply creates more rapport and more information. Planning your objectives, asking strong TEDS questions, and red teaming your assumptions all position you to listen better. And that’s where investigator confidence grows. You’re no longer scrambling to come up with the next clever question. Great interviews aren’t won with control; they’re built through rapport. Active listening is what gets you there.

When you use active listening techniques, it both builds rapport and improves information gathering. Summarizing what the interviewee has said helps confirm your understanding and often prompts them to expand or clarify, or correct misunderstandings. Effective pauses allow space for reflection and often lead people to share more. Emotional labeling or labeling is identifying and naming what the person seems to be feeling, it demonstrates empathy and interviewer understanding of what is being expressed. Reflecting key words or phrases back to the speaker keeps them explaining, encourages them to give more details, and when done properly will never be seen as an interruption. These active listening strategies are only possible when the right conditions are set—conditions that come from strong TEDS questions, which in turn stem from solid interview planning. When planning, questioning, and listening are working in sync, you create interviews that gather more and more accurate information. This is where real interviewer confidence is built.

Conclusion: Interview Confidence Is Earned

Interview confidence isn’t about having the gift of gab or being the loudest voice in the room. It’s built through science-based interviewing, a structured approach rooted in clear objectives, strong questioning strategies, and disciplined communication skills. Whether you're a new detective, an HR professional, or a corporate investigator, your confidence grows when you’ve planned with purpose, red teamed your assumptions, asked open-ended questions, and listened with intention. This is what separates a solid interview or interrogation from a misguided one; what turns a shaky conversation into a powerful investigative interview. When planning, listening, and rapport are aligned, your interviews become more accurate, ethical, and effective. In both the public and private sectors, science-based interviewing offers a reliable path forward. Confidence isn’t improvised. It’s earned, one intentional question at a time.