嫌疑人詢訊問中不同關係建立風格之效果檢驗

Abstract

研究者與實務工作者都強調建立關係（rapport-building）在嫌疑人詢訊問中的重要性，但少有研究比較不同建立關係的風格及其效果。有些人認為必須與嫌疑人建立較為親近的人際連結（即「關係基礎建立關係風格」），有些則主張強調建立關係必須相對中性且強化雙方對於訪談程序與角色的理解（即「程序基礎建立關係風格」）。本研究利用Russano 等人（2005）的作弊實驗典範，比較不同關係建立風格（關係基礎、程序基礎、無建立關係）對57名在「有罪」的參與者詢訊問的影響。結果顯示，相較於關係基礎與無建立關係組，在程序基礎組別的參與者有更高比例的人自白。然而，建立關係風格並不影響參與者揭露的細節數量。我們也發現，程序基礎的建立關係方式會影響參與者感知到的證據強度。本研究除了增進我們對於嫌疑人詢訊問的理解，也有助於未來建立以證據為基礎的詢訊問方式。

Both researchers and practitioners have stressed the importance of developing rapport in the investigative interviewing of criminal suspects. There is, however, no clear definition of what constitutes rapport and ways of achieving and maintaining rapport. Most research on rapport-building with suspects have focused on a positive personal bond between the investigator and suspect (i.e., relationship-based approach), while more recent research suggests a neutral type of rapport-building that focuses on developing a mutual understanding of the interrogation process and roles (i.e., procedure-based approach). The present study thus aimed to examine the effects of relationship- and procedure-based rapport-building approaches on suspect interviewing outcome. Using a modified version of Russano et al. (2005)’s cheating paradigm, ”guilty” participants were interviewed using different rapport-building approaches in a laboratory setting. We found that participants were more likely to confess in the procedure-based condition than in the relationship-based and control conditions. However, both approaches did not have an effect on the number of details participants were willing to disclose. We also found that the procedure-based approach affected participants’ perception about the evidence. Theoretical and practical implications for rapport-building in suspect interviewing are discussed.