#11492. Minimization, The Trojan Horse of Interviewing? Measuring Perceptions of Witness Interviewing Strategies

September 2026publication date
Proposal available till 08-06-2025
4 total number of authors per manuscript0 $

The title of the journal is available only for the authors who have already paid for
Journal’s subject area:
Law;
Psychology (all);
Pathology and Forensic Medicine;
Places in the authors’ list:
place 1place 2place 3place 4
FreeFreeFreeFree
2350 $1200 $1050 $900 $
Contract №11492.1 Contract №11492.2 Contract №11492.3 Contract №11492.4
1 place - free (for sale)
2 place - free (for sale)
3 place - free (for sale)
4 place - free (for sale)

Abstract:
Layperson perceptions of explicit and implicit witness interviewing tactics were examined. Residents (N = 293) read an interview transcript that contained a tactic (i.e., explicit threat or promise, one of four types of minimization, or no tactic) that aimed to persuade the witness to change his account. Participants were then asked to rate the amount of trouble the witness would be in if he (a) changed his account and (b) retained his original account, as well as their perceptions of the witness, interviewer, and tactic. Results showed that participants who viewed a tactic believed the witness would be in less trouble if he changed his account than if he retained his original account. All leniency-related strategies (i.e., explicit leniency and all minimization tactics) were rated as somewhat acceptable and respectful, frequently used, and legal for police to employ. Implications of these findings for witness interviewing are discussed.
Keywords:
Coercion; expert testimony; interviewing; police; witness

Contacts :
0