I. First, make sure you have read all of the material for Deception Detection, Interrogations & Confessions Questions. This includes the Hartwig, et. al. (2005), Kassin & Goldstein, Kassin & Sukel, and the Meissner & Kassin, pieces that have been assigned for this project.
II. Next, watch the following film clip, and answer the discussion questions that follow.
Title: Unprecedented Access Inside an Interrogation Room (FULL VIDEO) (41:20) (Chris Cuomo with officer Brian Harris of Texas).
***You can Google this from ABC, but make sure you watch the entire film (not just one clip). It is (41:20)
identify various strategies, cues, tactics, techniques, etc., AND the theoretical link of the same to the literature you read. Thus, choose those most salient or memorable, and be detailed in your answers (make sure you name, define, and explain them, including how and with whom they were used in the video). In some instances it may be appropriate to list (eg question 1a). Otherwise, use paragraph form and be mindful of your writing. Answers should be between 2-4 (3 is the average) pages long –TOTAL. I am looking for the substance of your answer, citation to the research, as well the number of items you can reference, so please balance them out.
Discussion Questions Re: Inside the Interrogation Room
1. The literature talked about a WIDE variety of tactics and strategies used in interrogation, some from the Reid technique, but not all.
1a. What strategies did Harris use & discuss, and what was his theory or explanation for why they would be effective? (name it, define/explain it-when/with whom was it used?).
1b. Did you notice Harris use any strategies that you may have read about in the literature, but that HE did not mention? Specifically, consider the social psychological factors that you read about. Again name it, define/explain it-when/with whom was it used?).
1c. What does the literature say:
c1. About the strategies you mention in 1.a? (eg: literature does not mention it, lit says effective/not effective, effective under specific conditions, effective with specific groups)?
c2. About the strategies or tactics you mention in 1b? (eg: here add whether you believe Harris knew what he was doing with each strategy, and then also talk about what the literature says about it).
1d. Was there anything that Harris did not mention, nor that was mentioned in the literature that you noticed (note: no is an ok answer—this q is subjective)
1e. Overall, what do you think about the strategies that Harris uses and discusses? How about any strategies that he uses but doesn’t discuss? (Eg: do you think they were effective/ineffective, ethical/unethical, borderline on both).
2. The literature also discussed a range of cues of deception (verbal and physical)
2a. List and describe some of the cues of deception that were addressed in the film. (again, make sure you name, define, describe and clarify with whom it was used).
2b. What did these cues indicate according to Harris?
2c. Was this consistent with what the literature says about that type of cue?
2d. What is your opinion of the referenced behavior as a cue?
3. Some of our readings focused on the question of whether police officers are really better at detecting deception than everyday civilians, and whether training and/or experience help in differentiating liars from truth tellers. Consider the fact that Harris is considered a “golden boy” in terms of his interrogation technique, ability to detect deception, and eventually secure a confession, and address the following:
3a. Harris does have a record that stands out among other investigators in terms of securing confessions.
1a. What does Harris/the film claim this is attributable to?
2a. What would the literature attribute his success to?
3a. Did you see evidence that confirmed that investigative training or experience make a difference? Or, do you believe Harris has a “gift” or intuition that ordinary civilians may have?
4a. How do you think a well-trained forensic psychologist (or other professionals-judges, lawyers, etc) might do in comparison to Harris?
****Note that there are a number of possible factors/variables you can address (eg. job/work experience, training on cues, use of evidence, personality, intuition, etc), “intuition”, s here, just explain your answer)
4. Harris claims that Houston is “Miranda on steroids.”
a. What did he mean by that? (Be specific and first show that you know what Miranda is, and what legal doctrines it stems from (hint this: this is both a Constitutional and case law answer)).
b. He also said that guilty suspects are more likely to waive their rights than the innocent. Does the literature confirm this? Be specific here.
5. Harris believes that part of his success is due to the fact that he treats his suspects with human dignity. He also mentions that some suspects display behavior that indicate “they have a soul”.
a. What do you think he meant by the “soul” comment?
b. Harris’ fame is largely based on the perception that his success is due to his treatment of suspects with dignity. Other people have argued that the opposite is true: his sympathy and empathy are not genuine and so his “human dignity” statement is a pretense for being manipulative and/or coercive. What do you think about how he treats his suspects-do you believe he treats them with genuine respect and dignity, or is it a ruse to get a confession.
c. Some people have also argued that Harris is a particular threat in terms of eliciting false confessions. Thy say he is starts with a firm belief that his suspects are guilty, thus, setting up a situation for confirmation bias. Explain confirmation bias and discuss whether he displayed signs of that or not, provide examples.
c1. Does it matter to you which is true, why/why not?
6. Finally, what did you think of Harris as an interrogator? Where was he good, where could he improve?
