Effects of Evidential and Non‐Evidential Interrogation Techniques on Suspects' Perception of Evidence in South Korea

ABSTRACT Interrogators use diverse techniques, and suspects try to analyze these to infer the amount of police evidence (perception of evidence). However, the link between technique types and the perception remains understudied. We examined perceptions of 27 evidential (e.g., disclosing evidence) and non‐evidential (e.g., rapport‐building) techniques in Study 1 ( N = 59 prisoners/detainees) and Study 2 ( N = 117 laypersons). We predicted evidential techniques would elicit higher perceived police evidence than non‐evidential ones. This hypothesis was partially supported in both studies: evidential techniques involving substantiated claims consistently yielded higher perceived evidence than non‐evidential techniques; however, unsubstantiated evidential techniques did not consistently differ from non‐evidential ones in perceived evidentiary value. Exploratory comparisons further revealed that detainees and prisoners perceived non‐evidential/crime‐irrelevant techniques as indicative of significantly less police evidence than laypersons, with broader perceptual variability observed across numerous individual techniques.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.70011
Primary Topic
Deception detection and forensic psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Effects of Evidential and Non‐Evidential Interrogation Techniques on Suspects' Perception of Evidence in South Korea

Aldert Vrij, Minhwan Jang, Timothy J. Luke, Mooel Kim
Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
Deception detection and forensic psychology
article

Effects of Evidential and Non‐Evidential Interrogation Techniques on Suspects' Perception of Evidence in South Korea

Aldert Vrij, Minhwan Jang, Timothy J. Luke, Mooel Kim
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Interrogators use diverse techniques, and suspects try to analyze these to infer the amount of police evidence (perception of evidence). However, the link between technique types and the perception remains understudied. We examined perceptions of 27 evidential (e.g., disclosing evidence) and non‐evidential (e.g., rapport‐building) techniques in Study 1 ( N = 59 prisoners/detainees) and Study 2 ( N = 117 laypersons). We predicted evidential techniques would elicit higher perceived police evidence than non‐evidential ones. This hypothesis was partially supported in both studies: evidential techniques involving substantiated claims consistently yielded higher perceived evidence than non‐evidential techniques; however, unsubstantiated evidential techniques did not consistently differ from non‐evidential ones in perceived evidentiary value. Exploratory comparisons further revealed that detainees and prisoners perceived non‐evidential/crime‐irrelevant techniques as indicative of significantly less police evidence than laypersons, with broader perceptual variability observed across numerous individual techniques.

Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender ProfilingVol. 23(2)
Daegu Arts University (KR), Department of Correctional Services (ZA), University of Portsmouth (GB), University of Gothenburg (SE), Daegu University (KR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Deception detection and forensic psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.