Interviewing Suspects in Denial: On How Different Evidence Disclosure Modes Affect the Elicitation of New Critical Information

This study examines how different evidence disclosure modes affect the elicitation of new critical information. Two modes derived from the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) framework were compared against an early disclosure mode (i.e., the evidence was disclosed at the outset of the interview). Participants (N = 88) performed a mock crime consisting of several actions before they were interviewed as suspects. In both SUE conditions the interviewer elicited and disclosed statement-evidence inconsistencies in two phases after an introductory phase. For the SUE-Confrontation (SUE-C) condition, the interview was introduced in a business-like manner, and the interviewer confronted the suspects with the in/consistencies without giving them a chance to comment on these. For the SUE-Introduce-Present-Respond (SUE-IPR) condition, the interviewer introduced the interview in a non-guilt-presumptive way, presented the in/consistencies and allowed the suspects to comment on these, and then responded to their comments; at all times in a non-judgmental manner. Both SUE conditions generated comparatively more statement-evidence inconsistencies. The SUE-IPR condition resulted in more new critical information about the phase of the crime for which the interviewer lacked information, compared to the Early disclosure condition. A likely explanation for this was that (for the SUE-IPR condition) the interviewer used the inconsistencies to create a fostering interview atmosphere and made the suspects overestimate the interviewer's knowledge about the critical phase of the crime. In essence, this study shows that in order to win the game (i.e., obtaining new critical information), the interviewer needs to keep the suspect in the game (i.e., by not being too confrontational and judgmental)

How to make perpetrators in denial disclose more information about their crimes

This study examined interview techniques for eliciting admissions from perpetrators of a crime. Two techniques derived from the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) framework (SUE-Confrontation and SUE-Confrontation/Explain) were compared to an Early Disclosure of Evidence technique. Participants (N = 75) performed a mock criminal task divided into three phases before being interviewed. In the SUE conditions, statement-evidence inconsistencies were obtained by strategic interviewing for Phases 1 and 2. For both SUE conditions, the interviewer confronted the suspects with these inconsistencies, emphasising that withholding information undermined their credibility. For the SUEConfrontation/Explain condition, the suspects were asked to explain each inconsistency. To restore their credibility, the suspects in the SUE conditions were expected to become more forthcoming in Phase 3 (the phase which lacked information). The suspects in the SUE-Confrontation condition (vs. the suspects in the Early Disclosure condition) disclosed more admissions about Phase 3. As predicted, the suspects in the SUE conditions perceived the interviewer to have had comparatively more information about Phase 3. The suspects in the SUEConfrontation/Explain condition strived to maintain their credibility either by fitting their story to the evidence or by sticking to the initial story. The study shows that the SUE technique is effective for eliciting admissions

Modelling of discharges from baltic sea shipping

This paper describes the new developments of the Ship Traffic Emission Assessment Model (STEAM) which enable the modelling of pollutant discharges to water from ships. These include nutrients from black/grey water discharges as well as from food waste. Further, the modelling of contaminants in ballast, black, grey and scrubber water, bilge discharges, and stern tube oil leaks are also described as well as releases of contaminants from antifouling paints. Each of the discharges is regulated by different sections of the IMO MARPOL convention, and emission patterns of different pollution releases vary significantly. The discharge patterns and total amounts for the year 2012 in the Baltic Sea area are reported and open-loop SOx scrubbing effluent was found to be the second-largest pollutant stream by volume. The scrubber discharges have increased significantly in recent years, and their environmental impacts need to be investigated in detail

Editors' Review and Introduction:Lying in Logic, Language, and Cognition

We describe some recent trends in research on lying from a multidisciplinary perspective, including logic, philosophy, linguistics, psychology, cognitive science, behavioral economics, and artificial intelligence. Furthermore, we outline the seven contributions to this special issue of topiCS.</p

Art as a Means to Disrupt Routine Use of Space

This paper examines the publicly visible aspects of counter-terrorism activity in pedestrian spaces as mechanisms of disruption. We discuss the objectives of counter-terrorism in terms of disruption of routine for both hostile actors and general users of public spaces, categorising the desired effects as 1) triangulation of attention; 2) creation of unexpected performance; and 3) choreographing of crowd flow. We review the potential effects of these existing forms of disruption used in counter-terrorism. We then present a palette of art, advertising, architecture, and entertainment projects that offer examples of the same disruption effects of triangulation, performance and flow. We conclude by reviewing the existing support for public art in counter-terrorism policy, and build on the argument for art as an important alternative to authority. We suggest that while advocates of authority-based disruption might regard the playfulness of some art as a weakness, the unexpectedness it offers is perhaps a key strengt

Memory development: implications for adults recalling childhood experiences in the courtroom

Adults frequently provide compelling, detailed accounts of early childhood experiences in the courtroom. Judges and jurors are asked to decide guilt or innocence based solely on these decades-old memories using 'common sense' notions about memory. However, these notions are not in agreement with findings from neuroscientific and behavioural studies of memory development. Without expert guidance, judges and jurors may have difficulty in properly adjudicating the weight of memory evidence in cases involving adult recollections of childhood experiences