1. Tatiana Tkacukova and Gavin Oxburgh
Patterns of co-operation between police interviewers with suspected sex offenders
Tatiana Tkacukova and Gavin Oxburgh

2. Psychology & Linguistics
Questioning strategies (Grant et al. 2015, Oxburgh et al. 2010)
Narrativisation and genres (Gibbons 2003: 142)
Intertextuality (Rock 2013)
Power relations and resistance to questioning (Newbury and Johnson 2006; Haworth 2006)
Police interviews in the judicial process (Haworth 2010)
Use of humour and turn-taking management (Carter 2009)

3. The role of second interviewer
Two interviewers in complex cases or cases with serious allegations
Guidance on cooperation is missing from training materials (e.g. CENTREX 2004)
Ord et al (2011: 53):
Agreement on the roles during Planning and preparation stage
Second interviewer’s role: critical active listening, monitoring the interviewing process, taking notes, operating any technical equipment
Two options for cooperation:
1. the lead interviewer conducts the interview on their own and the second interviewer asks clarifying questions only in the final stage of the proceedings
2. the lead interviewer stops at regular intervals (e.g. at the end of each topic/stage)

4. Potential challenges passing on the floor, turn-taking
collectively building rapport with the interviewee
retaining the coherent information elicitation process, including adhering to the questioning strategy and topic management
recognising that the lead interviewer may need to change the strategy during the questioning
Equally, conducting a complex interview on your own can also be challenging: Right at the moment, I just want to go away and think about whether I need to ask you anymore questions but ultimately you’ve admitted kissing and fingering her yesterday.

5. Why research cooperation patterns? High interest suspects
Psychology
Linguistics
Training
Building rapport
Empathy and psychological well-being
Comprehensibility and meaningfulness
Deception detection and false confessions
Conversation & non-verbal communication management
Narrativisation and intertextuality
Power relations
Intertextuality
Note-taking and active listening
Comprehensibility and meaningfulness of the questioning process

6. PEACE framework of conversation management
Planning and preparation (pre-interview stage)
Engage and explain
Account clarification and challenge
Closure
Evaluation (post-interview stage)

7. Dataset for pilot study
25 audio-recorded interviews with sex crime suspects (20 interviews with two interviewers + 5 with one interviewer):
10 interviews with suspects possessing/making child pornography images;
8 interviews with offenders suspected of sexual abuse of minors;
7 interviews with rape and sexual assault suspects.
Overall duration 35 hours
Interviews were fully transcribed and anonymised
Conversation Analysis transcription of parts of the interviews to reflect on how the utterances were uttered using specific signs to mark pauses, overlaps, hesitations, intonation, etc
(….) Got anything?\ Or (..) =

8. Research design Quantitative and qualitative analysis in three stages:
1. qualitative categorisation of individual interviews according to the PEACE model (3 researchers coding, inter-rater reliability 85%);
2. quantitative analysis of interviewers’ participation in different interview phases;
3. qualitative analysis of cooperation patterns.

9. Ratio of interviewers' turns
Int1
Int2
Number of Questioning Turns
Two interviewers – 20 interviews
Mean
75%
25%
378.62
Median
248.50
Standard Deviation
0.04
61.52

10. Engage and explain phase: second interviewers’ turn ratio

11. Account clarification and challenge phase: second interviewers’ turn ratio

12. Closure phase: second interviewers’ turn ratio

13. Patterns of cooperation
Int 2 asks clarifying Qs at the end of established topics
Int 2 covers pre-planned topics
Int: (26s) [Name of Int 2], just for the time being\ up to (.) the flat\
Int 2: hmm\
Int: (….) Got anything?\
Int 2: Er- who has access (.) to your flat?/
Int: okay/ (.) and so we got an account:/ from all of these people/ Sus: yeah/ Int: =we are going to tell you now what other people have said/ and [Int: 2]/ is going to tell you what: (name deleted – friend of mother of the victim)\ said/ Sus: yeah\

14. Role and impact of the second interviewer
as an institutional reinforcement of professional expertise:
That’s what we find happens, and we are specialists in -- in what we deal with, which is child abuse
as a way of strengthening the expression of empathy and compassion:
We do understand that it was a big up for you finding out that.
as a source for the reiteration of the seriousness of the situation:
I have to make this clear that they are there, (…) Interviewer 1 has made it absolutely clear that one of the issues is that  the person looking at that material if they are doing it on purpose may have a sexual interest towards children and we have a duty to ensure that children are protected, so we are going to give you one more opportunity, it’s really quite serious...
and most importantly as a mechanism for quality assurance of communication:
Do you understand the question? I’m concerned about the words [consent].

15. Good practice
Int: (26s) [Name of Int2], just for the time being\ up to (.) the flat\ Int 2: hmm\ Int: (….) Got anything?\ Int 2: Er- who has access (.) to your flat?/ Sus: (5s) How do you mean? Int 2: (.) So, is there anyone else that ca::n go in freely, has a key that can go in to your flat?/ Sus: No\= Int 2: =OK/ has there ever been?/ Sus: No\ Int: (16s) OK?/ Int 2: Yep\ Int: (6s) Now/ (..) we- we’ve talked about the flat and the flat is:: (.) er:m/ very important\ because it’s:: been described to us/ and pointed out to us by\ (victim)\ as being where (..) u:m, these offences occurred basically\

16. Not so good practice
Int: yea\, I- I- it sort of leads quite nicely into/ (.) discussing about ho:w well friends: that they have been and were/ but I don’t know whether it leads into discussing about the friendship now/ or- or whether just going straight on into the/=… Int 2: =I (..) I think that= Int: =the account/ Int 2: I’d rather cover the account\ and then we’ll/ Int: [yea ok/] Int 2: we’ll talk about your relationship with her\ Sus: ah-hmm\= Int 2: =after that because you’ll be:/ you’ve got something about the other friends etc/ Int: [yea exactly] Int 2: …and so I think so we’ll keep that as a separate topic\ Int: [ok], (..) so you’ve had this conversation/ and- and you’ve been talking about several different topics/… Sus: ah-hmm/

17. summary Need for clear guidelines
Raising awareness of advantages, impact & potential problems of tandem interviewing
Patterns of cooperation: clarifying Qs at the end of established topics, questioning on pre-planned topics
Impact of tandem interviewing: professional expertise, empathy and compassion, reiteration of the seriousness of the situation, quality assurance of communication
Essential features: planning, critical active listening, monitoring the interviewing

18. Bibliography
Centrex (2004). Police Training Manual. Bramshill, UK: Centrex.
Holmberg, U. (2009). Investigative interviewing as a therapeutic jurisprudential approach. In Williamson, T., Milne, B., Savage, S. (eds). International developments in investigative interviewing, London: William
Grant, T., Taylor, J., Oxburgh, G., & Myklebust, T. (2015). Exploring Types and Functions of Questions in Police Interviews. In Oxburgh, G., Myklebust, T., Grant, T., & Milne, R. (eds.), Communication in Investigative and Legal Contexts: Integrated Approaches from Forensic Psychology, Linguistics and Law Enforcement, Chichester: Wiley.
Haworth, K. (2006). The dynamics of power and resistance in police interview discourse. Discourse & society, 17(6),
Haworth, K. (2010). Police interviews in the judicial process. The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics, 169.
Ord, B., Shaw, G., & Green, T. (2011). Investigative interviewing explained. LexisNexis Butterworths.
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 & the Law, 17(1), Shawyer, A., Milne, B., & Bull, R. (2009). Investigative interviewing in the UK. In Williamson, T., Milne, B., Savage, S. (eds). International developments in investigative interviewing, London: William
Rock, F. (2013). “Every link in the chain”: The police interview as textual intersection. In Heffer, C., Rock, F., & Conley, J. (Eds.). Legal-lay communication: Textual travels in the law. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Shepherd, E. (2007). Investigative interviewing. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Vrij, A., Fisher, R., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2009). Increasing cognitive load in interviews to detect deceit. In Williamson, T., Milne, B., Savage, S. (eds). International developments in investigative interviewing. London: William