There is a timeless adage: "Failing to prepare is preparing to fail," which holds true for any investigation. Whether dealing with a witness, a suspect, or a victim, the quality and outcomes of investigative interviews hinge significantly on the investigator's ability to plan and prepare for their interviews effectively. An investigative interview, often loaded with legal implications, requires more than just walking in with a list of questions and a belief in the case. Preparation necessitates careful consideration, strategy, and above all, the application of critical thinking. This article underscores the paramount importance of critical thinking in achieving success in an investigative interview and ultimately an investigation.
1. Building a Foundation of Rapport
Who are you going to interview? Who are they? How do they view you the investigator? The most crucial part of any investigative interview is establishing rapport with the interviewee. Without rapport, getting genuine and accurate interview will only be tougher for the interviewer. Preparing ahead of time allows the investigator to adopt a non-confrontational approach, know who they are interviewing, and encourages the interviewee to provide more information. Good investigators prepare, they chat, they remain curious, they ask open-ended questions, they build rapport, and they most of all they listen. This quote highlights the underlying philosophy that planning and preparation leads to more conversational and productive interviews when you prepare to establish rapport.
2. Red Teaming is Critical Thinking
When preparing for your investigative interviews, the art of critical thinking is indispensable. However, merely the knowledge of critical thinking or thinking you do so is not enough; wielding it effectively is the game-changer. A technique IXI instructors use and advocate for is red teaming, which offers investigators a structured method to bolster their critical thinking processes avoiding common biases that are common in investigations:
Confirmation bias is a cognitive phenomenon where individuals tend to seek out, interpret, and remember information that aligns with their pre-existing beliefs, while simultaneously overlooking or disregarding evidence that contradicts these beliefs. This bias can inadvertently lead to flawed reasoning and decision-making since it promotes a one-sided view of investigative issues. It manifests in various scenarios, from an individual's personal beliefs and perceptions to rigorous criminal investigations. By favoring information that reaffirms established opinions, confirmation bias can create a distorted reality, reinforcing stereotypes, and perpetuating misinformation. Recognizing and actively counteracting this bias is crucial for a more objective understanding of you case and for making well-informed decisions.
Guilt bias refers to the predisposition to perceive someone as guilty based on limited or circumstantial evidence, or sometimes even in the absence of concrete evidence. It is a form of judgmental bias that can result from previous negative experiences or reliance on pseudoscientific investigative interviewing practices (anxiety cues for lie detection). Guilt bias can be particularly detrimental in legal and investigative contexts, where impartiality is paramount. For instance, if an investigator or juror has a preconceived notion of a suspect's guilt, they may disproportionately weigh incriminating evidence while discounting exculpatory evidence. This can lead to miscarriages of justice, where innocent individuals are wrongfully accused or convicted. Recognizing and mitigating guilt bias is essential to ensure fair and objective evaluations of situations and your case.
By deliberately challenging assumptions and taking alternative perspectives, red teaming pushes investigators to anticipate alternate scenarios, craft nuanced interview questions and answers, and ensure they are not blindsided by unexpected investigative revelations.
The methodology of red teaming should be effectively harnessed to refine critical thinking during the planning phase of investigative interviews. For an investigator, understanding the potential resistance strategies, contradictions, and alternative explanations an interviewee might present is crucial. The red teaming approach requires an investigator to assume the role of another investigator and challenge the main investigation's strategies, assumptions, and conclusions. By doing so, it allows the interviewer to remain in control and allow the interview to acquire relevant, accurate, and unbiased information.
Challenging one's own assumptions is pivotal in combating confirmation and guilt biases, particularly in the context of an investigation leading up to an investigative interview. \ By actively challenging personal assumptions and striving for an unbiased assessment, investigators encourage a broader analysis of the evidence and allow for alternative hypotheses to be explored. This approach fosters a more balanced and thorough investigation by deliberately invoking critical thinking skills.
3. Reducing the Risk of Missing Vital Information
A common pitfall in investigative interviews is the overlooking of small details that might be critical to the case. This could even be the elusive unknown, unknown. Proper planning and preparation help ensure that every investigative lead, criminal element, and piece of information is explored. By crafting interview questions and investigative objectives beforehand, an investigator can significantly reduce the chance of missing crucial pieces of information (Walsh & Bull, 2012). Preparing the proper questions and questioning strategy is crucial to gathering the most information from whomever is being interviewed.
4. Bolstering Confidence and Credibility
For an investigator, credibility is currency. “Just winging it” is not a competent strategy. Newer investigators often struggle with confidence, planning and red teaming are the antidote for doubt and uncertainty. Walking into an investigative interview armed with in-depth knowledge, planned questions, and red teamed assumptions helps establish the investigator's credibility. It also gives the investigator the confidence to handle the interview adeptly, remain flexible, and able to expect the unexpected.
Conclusion
The weight of an investigative interview on an investigations cannot be understated, they are the most important part of any investigation. Interview outcomes have the potential to shape investigations, influence judicial proceedings, and, at times, alter the course of lives. With such high stakes, the importance of planning and preparation becomes paramount.
An investigator's diligence in the pre-interview phase – crafting interview question, applying red teaming principles, and anticipating challenges – often spells the difference between success and failure. It's a blend of art and science, where the commitment to meticulous preparation invariably pays dividends in the form of accurate, actionable, and legally sound information. Make sure you are trained properly.
References:
Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2012). Examining rapport in investigative interviews with suspects: Does its building and maintenance work? Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 27(1), 73-84.
留言