
The Investigative Interview Opening Method
Teach to Talk® is ASC’s practitioner-developed, research-informed method for beginning consequential interviews. Before substantive questioning starts, the interviewer makes the process understandable, teaches the standard for useful information, rehearses it through the Pen Standard, creates reciprocal controls, verifies readiness, and then hands over the narrative floor.
The goal is not more words. It is the best information genuinely available, with its source, certainty, and limits intact.
You don’t need a script. You need a strategy.
Interviewers routinely tell people to start at the beginning, provide every detail, take their time, and avoid guessing. Those instructions sound obvious to the interviewer. They are not necessarily obvious to the person being interviewed.
What counts as a detail? Should an estimate be reported as a fact? Does “everything” include information learned later? Is silence truly permitted? Can the person correct the interviewer? What happens when memory reaches its limit? When the rules remain hidden, people improvise. They rush, omit, summarize, guess, wait for narrow questions, or blend direct experience with inference and later information. Teach to Talk® makes the task visible before the account begins.
The person is expected to perform an unfamiliar communication task without being shown how.
Narrow or premature questioning can replace the person’s organization with the interviewer’s theory.
Observation, inference, estimate, and later-acquired information can quietly merge into one account.
Teach to Talk® is a pre-elicitation readiness protocol. It does not replace lawful warnings, retrieve memory by itself, determine credibility, or control the later disclosure of evidence. Its job is narrower and foundational: prepare the person to participate before substantive questioning begins.
The wording changes with the person, role, authority, vulnerability, and setting. The five functions remain.
The interviewer explains who they are, why the conversation is occurring, how it will work, who is present, how it will be recorded or documented, how information may be used, and what meaningful rights, choices, and limits apply. Communication and access needs are addressed before performance is evaluated.
The interviewer teaches that accuracy outranks speed and volume. The person is asked for every genuinely available detail while distinguishing direct experience, inference, estimates, later-acquired information, and genuine limits such as “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember.”
The interviewer uses the Pen Standard to let the person practice the rules on neutral material before applying them to consequential memory.
The interviewer and the person establish pace, silence, clarification, correction, breaks, and shared pause or slow-down signals. Expectations run in both directions.
The interviewer verifies understanding through performance, resolves remaining barriers, makes a proceed, adapt, or delay decision, and then transfers the narrative floor with a broad invitation.
The Pen Standard uses the interviewer’s own pen to demonstrate fine-grained description, information access, source boundaries, uncertainty, and the limits of memory. The person first describes what can be observed from across the table. The interviewer then describes and disassembles a familiar pen, showing how experience can provide access to information unavailable to an outsider.
The interviewer also teaches the limit of the analogy: memory is not a physical object available for complete inspection. Experiencing an event does not guarantee that every detail was perceived, retained, or remains retrievable. The pen then stays in the interviewer’s hand as a shared visual cue.
Object-based detail demonstrations exist in investigative-interviewing practice and research. The Teach to Talk® application is defined by the complete use of the pen: neutral rehearsal, explicit memory boundaries, performance-based teach-back, and a continuing non-accusatory cue used to restore the shared information standard throughout the interview.
Once readiness is established, the interviewer transfers the floor and protects the person’s first narrative. Cognitive Interview techniques may then facilitate retrieval of additional genuine information. Careful questioning clarifies and develops the account. Strategic Use of Evidence, where appropriate, tests the account later without contaminating its beginning.
The five TEACH functions remain consistent. The frame must change with the room.
Status, custody, voluntariness, warnings, counsel, recording, safety, and use of statements must be resolved before the account begins.
Authority, investigator role, participation expectations, confidentiality limits, anti-retaliation protections, representation, and information sharing must be clear.
Role, process, support measures, privacy limits, advisor participation, institutional policy, and decision-making separation must be accurately framed.
Representation, privilege, work-product boundaries, purpose, recording, preparation versus fact development, and downstream use must be understood.
Contractual duties, authorization, recording, confidentiality, reporting, safeguarding, and external referral requirements must be tailored to the applicable system.
The operational TEACH sequence sits inside ASC’s larger communication philosophy.
Understand the person’s perspective, perceived risk, motivations, and communication needs well enough to create a workable path to information. Strategic empathy does not require agreement and does not promise a preferred outcome.
Every question, instruction, pause, and disclosure should serve a defined purpose. The interviewer knows what communication problem each technique is intended to solve.
The interviewer changes language, pace, sequence, and support in response to the person and the conditions without abandoning lawful requirements or the method’s core functions.
The TEACH sequence structures the beginning. The Adaptive Strategies Compass™ helps the interviewer navigate later changes, barriers, and strategic decisions without falling back on a rigid script.
Teach to Talk® incorporates principles supported by Cognitive Interview research, rapport and procedural-justice research, non-coercive information-gathering practices, the Méndez Principles, and other established interviewing work. ASC credits those sources directly.
The complete TEACH sequence and the continuing Pen Standard application are presented as practitioner-developed architecture. The complete protocol has not yet been independently validated as superior to other evidence-based interview openings. ASC therefore describes Teach to Talk® as research-informed and evidence-aligned while developing fidelity measures and opportunities for comparative evaluation.
Participants practice how to:
Teach to Talk® reflects Joseph R. Auriemma, Jr.’s 24 years of investigative experience and ASC’s work with professionals across law enforcement, government, education, legal, workplace, and other high-stakes settings. Testimonials describe participant experience with ASC instruction; they are not substitutes for independent outcome validation.
“Joe, you were a great instructor. We learned a lot from you and will take on some of what we learned. Would highly recommend you to anyone interested.”
Deputy Chief of Investigations Salvatore Salerno, NY State Justice CenterTeach the process. Rehearse the standard. Verify readiness. Then hand over the account.
No. It is a function-based opening protocol. Interviewers learn five required functions and adapt their language to the person, authority, vulnerability, setting, and available time.
No. Teach to Talk® prepares the person to participate before substantive elicitation. Cognitive Interview techniques may be used afterward to facilitate retrieval of additional genuine information.
No. The pen demonstrates information access and fine-grained description. It also teaches that memory has limits. Experiencing an event does not guarantee that every detail was encoded, retained, or remains retrievable.
It is a shared cue to slow down, return to the moment, break it into smaller pieces, search for genuine detail, preserve source and uncertainty, and stop where memory stops. It is not an accusation and does not require the person to produce more.
Yes, when it is adapted to the person’s legal and organizational status and does not replace required warnings, rights, representation, consent, or policy protections.
Yes. The same communication architecture applies, but the interviewer must accurately explain authorization, role, participation expectations, confidentiality limits, anti-retaliation protections, representation, and information use.
Its components are informed by established interviewing and behavioral-science research. The complete proprietary protocol should be described as research-informed or evidence-aligned until it has been independently evaluated as a complete method.
No. The opening is not a deception test. It is designed to improve the conditions under which a person can provide and qualify an account.