Managing disclosure outcomes in intelligence interviews

Author:

Neequaye David A.12ORCID,Luke Timothy J.1ORCID,Kollback Kristina1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg , Gothenburg, Sweden

2. Department of Psychology, Lancaster University , Lancaster, UK

Abstract

We introduce the disclosure-outcomes management model. The model views disclosure in intelligence interviews as a behaviour interviewees use to profitably navigate self-interest dilemmas. We theorized that interviewees compare the potential outcomes of disclosing to their self-interests. They evaluate the extent to which disclosure will facilitate or impede those self-interests: an interviewee’s self-interest dilemma elicits cooperation with respect to some information but not other information. A Preliminary Study ( N = 300) supported the model’s predictions. We proposed a Replication Study ( N = 369) to examine the model further. Participants assumed the role of an intelligence source undergoing an interview. They decided what information to disclose, contending the typical dilemma in an intelligence interview wherein disclosure could jeopardize or advance their self-interests. The results from the Preliminary and Replication studies were broadly in line with our proposition: perceived benefits positively influenced the likelihood of disclosing. However, a negative interaction between costs and benefits observed in the Preliminary Study did not replicate. That finding may be due to power constraints, not evidence against the existence of an interaction effect. Our proposal that—generally speaking—interviewees are likelier to disclose information units that seem less versus more risky requires further examination. Individual-level sensitivity to benefits, costs and their co-occurrence varied substantially in our studies. We discuss avenues for future research.

Funder

The Lars Hiertas Memorial Foundation

Publisher

The Royal Society

Reference29 articles.

1. Criminal versus HUMINT Interrogations: The Importance of Psychological Science to Improving Interrogative Practice

2. Towards a Science of Interrogation

3. Human Intelligence Interviewing and Interrogation: Assessing the Challenges of Developing an Ethical, Evidence-based Approach

4. Dawson EC . 2015 Improving investigative interviews: facilitating disclosure of information through implicit means. New York, NY: Graduate Center, City University of New York. See https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/900.

5. Neequaye DA . 2018 Eliciting information in intelligence interviews through priming: an examination of underlying mechanisms. Gothenburg, Sweden: Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg. See https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/57528.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3