Home/About/Myths vs. Realities
Myths vs. Realities of investigative interviewing, four myth cards on the left, five strategic directions on the right, framed around a centered figure
Myths vs. Realities

Research-Based Corrections

What everyone knows. What the research shows.

Ten beliefs about investigative interviewing are widely held across law enforcement, legal, education, HR, and adjacent fields. Most of them do not survive contact with the research. This page examines each myth in turn, presents the peer-reviewed evidence against it, and shows how the Teach to Talk® methodology corrects for it. Across the ten entries, twenty-plus peer-reviewed citations from fifteen-plus researchers anchor the corrections in evidence, not opinion.

Belief isn’t evidence. Research is.

20+ peer-reviewed citations·15+ researchers named·Built on cognitive science and forensic interviewing research

Myths Examined
10
Citations
20+ Peer-Reviewed
Research Lineage
Fisher, Granhag, Vrij, Kassin, Lamb
Audience
All 5 Sectors
Explore the Methodologies
10
Widely-Held Myths Examined
20+
Peer-Reviewed Citations
15+
Researchers Named
8
Strategic Directions in the Corrective System

By Joseph R. Auriemma, Jr. · Founder, Advanced Strategic Communications · 24 years New York State Police

Jump to a Myth

Ten myths. One scrollable page.

01 Spotting liars by body language 02 Effective interviewing requires a script 03 If someone confesses, it must be true 04 Witnesses and victims will just tell the truth 05 Open-ended questions are too slow 06 Interview training is only for law enforcement 07 Confront inconsistencies immediately 08 Long interviews produce better results 09 You can’t prepare for an interview 10 Good interviewers are born, not made
Group 1

The Deception Myths

One myth dominates popular understanding of interviewing more than any other: that deception can be detected by watching the body. The research is clear, and the research is consistent.

Myth 1 · Deception Detection 01

Myth 1: “You can spot liars by watching body language.”

The belief that liars avoid eye contact, fidget, or shift posture is widespread, but decades of research show these behaviors are not reliable indicators of deception. A comprehensive meta-analysis by Bond and DePaulo (2006) examined over 200 studies and found the average accuracy rate for lie detection was just 54%, no better than flipping a coin. Dr. Aldert Vrij concluded there are no nonverbal behaviors that uniquely signal lying.

Teach to Talk® Insight

Nonverbal communication matters, but not in the way most people think. The Beyond Words training teaches investigators to observe changes in baseline behavior, not isolated gestures, as potential indicators of stress or internal conflict. Behavior is interpreted in context, never as a stand-alone deception indicator.

Where this is taught: Beyond Words ›
Group 2

The Interview Structure Myths

Three myths concern how interviews should be structured. Scripts, open-ended questions, and preparation. The research has answered each one. The corrective system uses the eight strategic directions of the Adaptive Strategies Compass™.

Myth 2 · Scripted Interviewing 02

Myth 2: “Effective interviewing requires you to follow a script.”

While some structure is helpful, rigid scripts are a poor substitute for real conversational skill. The Cognitive Interview (CI), developed by Fisher & Geiselman, is a flexible, non-scripted approach that enhances memory recall by up to 50% compared to standard questioning (Fisher & Geiselman, 1992). Over-reliance on scripted questions can also trigger confirmation bias.

Teach to Talk® Insight

Teach to Talk® replaces scripts with adaptive frameworks. The Route Map methodology teaches investigators to plan branching conversational pathways, anticipating resistance and turning points rather than memorizing question sequences. The result is preparation without rigidity, structure without performance.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Myth 5 · Question Design 05

Myth 5: “Open-ended questions are too slow and inefficient.”

Research by Oxburgh, Myklebust, and Grant (2010) found that open-ended questions elicit longer, more informative, and more reliable responses while minimizing interviewer bias. Lamb et al. (2011) concluded that open-ended questioning leads to higher rates of accurate detail and fewer errors.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The Cognitive Interview methodology integrates open-ended prompts with context reinstatement and varied retrieval techniques. Investigators learn to use open prompts strategically to surface details that direct questioning misses, then narrow to closed questions only after the narrative account is on the record.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Myth 9 · Preparation 09

Myth 9: “You can’t prepare for an interview because every conversation is unpredictable.”

Clarke and Milne (2001) found that structured preparation, including pre-interview planning and scenario mapping, significantly improves interview outcomes in investigative settings. Even in fast-paced environments, preparation ensures you’re not relying solely on instinct or improvisation.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The Route Map methodology teaches investigators to prepare without scripting. Define the objective, anticipate likely resistance points, plan branching pathways for different conversational outcomes, identify the evidence that will be deployed and when. Preparation produces flexibility, not rigidity, and it is the only variable the interviewer fully controls.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Group 3

The Confession Myths

Three myths involve confessions: how to read them, when to confront, and how long to interview. The research has reshaped what defensible practice looks like across all three.

Myth 3 · Confession Reliability 03

Myth 3: “If someone confesses, it must be true.”

Confessions are persuasive, but they are not always accurate. Kassin et al. (2009) found that jurors tend to overvalue confessions, even when obtained through coercion. Drizin and Leo (2004) documented 125 proven false confessions, many involving minors or people with cognitive impairments subjected to lengthy, high-pressure interrogations.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The Reid Technique is commonly categorized by critics and researchers as an accusatorial interrogation model. Empirical research on accusatorial interrogation methods has found that such methods can increase the risk of false confessions, particularly when combined with coercive pressure, minimization, maximization, deception, or questioning of vulnerable suspects. Reid & Associates disputes the claim that the properly applied Reid Technique causes false confessions. Teach to Talk® was built specifically to chart a different course. In 2011, the Nunez case, a New York homicide where the lead investigator delivered the Reid Technique as he had been trained to deliver it and the resulting interrogation was largely suppressed and the jury acquitted, became the inflection point. The same body of research that critiques accusatorial methods has also driven a wave of state legislation, beginning with Illinois and Oregon in 2021, restricting deceptive or accusatorial interrogation of juveniles.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Myth 7 · Confrontation Timing 07

Myth 7: “The best way to get the truth is to confront inconsistencies immediately.”

Research shows that premature confrontation often shuts down disclosure, increases resistance, and reduces cooperation. Hartwig, Granhag, and Vrij (2005) demonstrated that strategic disclosure of evidence, saving confrontational elements until later, improves information yield and prevents suspects from adjusting their stories.

Teach to Talk® Insight

Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), developed by Granhag and Hartwig, teaches investigators to delay evidence disclosure until after the subject has committed to a version of events. The Brandyn Foster homicide investigation is one applied example. Across 381 days, strategic timing of evidence disclosure was central to how digital records were used to develop the case. Premature confrontation would have collapsed the strategy at multiple points.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Myth 8 · Interview Duration 08

Myth 8: “Long interviews always produce better results.”

Research by Kassin and Gudjonsson (2004) shows that prolonged interviews, especially those lacking breaks or conducted late at night, are correlated with higher rates of false confessions and unreliable information. Short, well-structured interviews often produce more reliable and accurate accounts.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The ACCESS Model emphasizes structured, paced interviews with deliberate breaks rather than marathon sessions. Investigators learn to recognize signs of fatigue, build cognitive recovery into the interview architecture, and produce reliable evidence within timeframes that respect both ethical limits and the psychological reality of how memory and disclosure work.

Where this is taught: From Information to Evidence ›
Group 4

The Audience and Skill Myths

Three myths concern who interviews are for and who can do them well. Witnesses, sectors, and natural talent. Each one is wrong in a way that matters for the work.

Myth 4 · Witness and Victim Memory 04

Myth 4: “Witnesses and victims will just tell the truth; they don’t need a strategy.”

Trauma, fear, loyalty, shame, confusion, and memory fragmentation can all interfere with how information is processed and shared. Research by Goodman & Melinder (2007) found that trauma-exposed individuals may struggle with recall or present inconsistently, especially when faced with authority figures or emotionally charged environments.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The Cognitive Interview (developed by Fisher and Geiselman) is the most research-validated technique for improving recall accuracy from victims and witnesses. The Trauma Informed Interviewing course extends the technique with trauma-informed practice for cases where disclosure is non-linear and memory is fragmented by stress.

Where this is taught: Trauma Informed Interviewing ›
Myth 6 · Cross-Sector Application 06

Myth 6: “Interview training is only for law enforcement.”

Research from the EEOC and SHRM highlights the inconsistencies and legal risks that arise when HR professionals conduct interviews without training. In education, Title IX and DASA investigations require neutral, trauma-informed questioning that many administrators are never formally trained in.

Teach to Talk® Insight

The Teach to Talk® philosophy was designed from the start to serve both public and private sectors. Whether the investigator is a detective, a principal, a Title IX coordinator, an HR director, an attorney, or a compliance officer, the same core methodology applies. The context changes, the framework does not. ASC offers sector-specific courses in addition to the flagship law enforcement training.

Where this is taught: Browse the full catalog ›
Myth 10 · Skill Development 10

Myth 10: “Good interviewers are born, not made.”

Research by Baldwin (1992) and the International Investigative Interviewing Research Group (iIIRG) consistently shows that training improves interviewer confidence, ethical standards, and information quality. Organizations that invest in systematic training see fewer legal challenges and more reliable outcomes.

Teach to Talk® Insight

Investigative interviewing is a learned discipline. The Academy and From Information to Evidence courses are built to develop the mindset and the methodology in investigators of every experience level. Newer investigators build the framework from scratch. Veterans refine technique against current research. Success is built on preparation, practice, and purpose, not left to chance or natural talent.

Where this is taught: The Academy ›

Last updated: June 2026

Bibliography

References & Further Reading

Peer-reviewed and authoritative sources cited above, listed alphabetically by first author. APA-style formatting.

  1. Baldwin, J. (1992). Videotaping police interviews with suspects: An evaluation. Police Research Series, Paper No. 1. London: Home Office Police Department.
  2. Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 214–234.
  3. Clarke, C., & Milne, R. (2001). National evaluation of the PEACE Investigative Interviewing Course. London: Home Office, Police Research Award Scheme.
  4. Drizin, S. A., & Leo, R. A. (2004). The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 891–1008.
  5. FBI High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG). (2016). Interrogation: A Review of the Science. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation.
  6. Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
  7. Goodman, G. S., & Melinder, A. (2007). Child witness research and forensic interviews of young children: A review. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12(1), 1–19.
  8. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2005). Police interrogation from a social psychology perspective. Policing and Society, 15(4), 379–399.
  9. International Investigative Interviewing Research Group (iIIRG). Ongoing publications on investigative interviewing research and practice.
  10. Kassin, S. M., et al. (2009). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34(1), 3–38.
  11. Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(2), 33–67.
  12. Lamb, M. E., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P. W. (2011). Tell me what happened: Structured investigative interviews of child victims and witnesses. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
  13. Oxburgh, G., Myklebust, T., & Grant, T. (2010). The question of question types in police interviews: A review of the literature from a psychological and linguistic perspective. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 17(1), 45–66.
  14. United Nations. (2021). Principles on Effective Interviewing for Investigations and Information Gathering (the Méndez Principles).
  15. Vrij, A. (various). Multiple works on deception detection and investigative interviewing.

From the research to the room.

Knowing what doesn’t work is half the discipline. The other half is having a methodology that does. Every ASC course is built on the corrections this page documents, refined across 24 years of investigative work, and anchored in the same research literature cited above. Or schedule a conversation directly.

Browse All TrainingExplore the Methodologies