Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Steven Watson
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Background In 2015, the UK enhanced protection for victims of domestic abuse by criminalising controlling and coercive behaviour. However, there have been few prosecutions. One suggested reason for the low number of prosecutions is officers’ lack of experience interviewing to convict for control and coercion. Our aims are to help prepare interviewers by examining the influencing techniques used by such suspects. Methods Control and coercion suspects speech during interviews (N = 25) were content coded for influencing techniques based on a framework developed from existing theory (e.g., neutralization theory, the Table of Ten). Results Suspects used four principle forms of influence: (1) rational arguments to convince of their innocence; (2) justifications to minimise perception of harm or deflect blame; (3) relational arguments to bias police perceptions in the suspect’s favour; and (4) reputational arguments to impose dominance in the interview. Discussion A few core arguments were used extensively by most suspects. We also identified a number of less widely used, but nonetheless relevant strategies that suspects used to try to convince officers of their innocence. The strategies identified in the current research can help interviewers prepare for facing ‘typical’ arguments from suspects of controlling and coercive behavior.
Author(s): Watson SJ, Luther K, Jackson J, Taylor PJ, Alison L
Publication type: Conference Proceedings (inc. Abstract)
Publication status: Published
Conference Name: International Investigative Interviewing Research Group 11th Annual Conference
Year of Conference: 2018
Online publication date: 04/07/2018
Acceptance date: 09/04/2018
Publisher: iIIRG
URL: http://conference.iiirg.org/
