Human rights is not enough: The need for demonstrating efficacy of an ethical approach to interviewing in India
Authors: Alison, Laurence1; Sarangi, Sudhansu2; Wright, Allison3
Source: Legal and Criminological Psychology, Volume 13, Number 1, February 2008 , pp. 89-106(18)
Publisher: British Psychological Society
Abstract:
PurposeThe present study compared attitudes about Human Rights (HR) and the advocation of coercive interviewing practices amongst Indian Police Officers, Offenders and a sample from the General Public. Method100 Police Officers, 50 Offenders and 50 members of the General Public completed a questionnaire that assessed their attitudes about the Human Rights of suspects and the use of coercion in suspect interviews. ResultsPolice Officers and the Public accepted both custodial violence and the use of intimidating interrogation strategies more readily than Offenders. They were also more prepared to suspend Suspects' Human Rights. Further, individuals who scored high on a coercive belief scale (CBS) were particularly inclined to favour custodial violence and suspend Human Rights. In addition, the self-reported frequency with which Police Officers used intimidating and non-intimidating interviewing techniques was related to their beliefs about Suspects' Human Rights and the extent to which they perceived intimidating interviewing methods to be useful. ConclusionAttitudes about effective interviewing strategies may well be embedded within a broad social context. The effectiveness of a Human Rights Agenda requires that officers in India are informed of the effectiveness of ethical interviewing standards and the practical and legal dangers of using inappropriate methods.Document Type: Research article
DOI: 10.1348/135532506X157737
Affiliations: 1: Professor of Forensic Psychology, University of Liverpool, UK 2: Deputy Inspector General of Police, Orissa, India 3: Psychology Department, University of Portsmouth, UK

Click here for Page Help