Examining Rapport in Investigative Interviews with Suspects: Does its Building and Maintenance Work?

Rapport is an important part of the interviewing of suspects, enabling them to supply information more freely. This study examined 142 actual interviews with suspects, focussing on key tasks that aid rapport. Using an established framework to examine rapport building skills in the early stages of interviews, the study also measured how skilled attempts at sustaining rapport were when interviewers attempted to gather information from suspects and probe accounts for their reliability. It was found that opportunities were often missed to build rapport in the initial stages as several tasks were overlooked. Also, where any rapport had been initially built, it was not always maintained as tasks undertaken later in the interview which may well have assisted rapport maintenance were often conducted unsatisfactorily. Thus, initial rapport building of itself, therefore, is not sufficient in influencing overall interview quality and outcomes, since rapport also has to be maintained throughout the interview.     

What really is effective in interviews with suspects? A study comparing interviewing skills against interviewing outcomes

Purpose. The present study examines whether interviewing in a manner that is compatible with a recommended model of interviewing (called the ‘PEACE’ model) impacts on outcomes of the interviews examined in contrast to prior studies which have usually been concerned whether the conducted interviews were fair and not coercive or whether there had been positive effects of training upon subsequent interview performance. Methods. This study, examining in detail 142 actual suspect interviews, is set in the barely researched area of social security benefit fraud, reflecting current trends in Britain concerning increasing numbers of interviews with suspects undertaken by public sector organizations and the pluralization of policing. Results. It was found that good interviewing in each of the recommended stages that make up the PEACE model generally led to better interviews, indicating the importance that each stage contributes to overall interview quality. Further, the quality of interviews was compared against a range of interview outcomes and it was found that skilled PEACE interviewing was associated with the securing of full accounts, including confessions. Conclusion. Given the few examples of skilled interviewing found in the study it is argued that further training of investigators is necessary to improve both interviewing performance and organizational outcomes.     

District Judges and Possession Proceedings

In this article, we draw on data obtained in interviews with District Judges about the factors which they say influence the exercise of their discretion in possession proceedings. Analysing the data set enabled us to create three ideal types of judicial decision—making which we have labelled 'liberal', 'patrician', and formalist'. We discuss the differences between each ideal type across five different variables: the District Judge role; approach; view of occupiers; the problem; behaviour of occupiers. Our data demonstrate a set of reasons to explain different approaches and outcomes between different District Judges (as well as the perhaps unlikely identification of a 'maverick' or 'idiosyncratic' style of judging). We conclude by suggesting on the basis of our data that, despite calls to structure or remove the discretion from District Judges, any such changes are unlikely to have much effect.