Talk:Reid technique

message: I don't know anything more about this subject than I read here and on other webpages (including the links I added).  I couldn't resist, however, completing the 9 steps so I was bold and did so.  So far no objections so my next step would be to assume that this meets the request to 'improve this page' (can't see any explanation for the request beyond the obvious) and so I should delete that tag.  If I don't hear anything in a day or so, I'll delete it.
Tre1234 23:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Complete listing of 9 steps

message: Like many interrogation forms, the Reid technique has been accused of inducing subjects to confess to something that he or she did not do. A British study has indicated that around 20 percent of people interrogated this way will confess, whether guilty or not.
*The Innocence Project in New York found that out of 123 people who have been exonerated by DNA evidence, nearly 27 percent had falsely confessed to the crime. 
* But it’s a different story in Britain. There, under pressure from the courts, police won’t use those tactics. What’s more, they’ve determined that one in five people brought in for interrogation may be vulnerable to confessing to crimes they didn’t commit. [ibid]
:Another good source is "Why Do People Confess to Crimes They Didn't Commit?"—it's a New York Magazine article that explains how John Reid helped change the way criminal investigations were conducted and replaced the third degree with the Reid technique, but also brings up the question of whether the Reid technique is just the third degree in a different (namely, psychological) guise.--173.51.112.10 (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs source

message: I'm troubled by the claim that "The use of lies..." is not a sanctioned part of the Reid Technique.
Inbau and Reid state that the interrogator must "Avoid creating the impression that you are an investigator seeking a confession or conviction." Instead, the interogator is to appear as a neutral but interested party, someone who just wants to sort this mess out before it gets any worse, and ultimately a father confessor. The interrogator may adopt a sympathetic persona such that the alleged actions of the subject are minimised in their deviation from the norm: "You took the money to buy food for your kids, right? Who could blame you for that?". "What man *wouldn't do something about it if his wife's playing around, right Joe?", etc.
All of this is deeply deceptive, so it seems to me that the claim that lying is not sanctioned is mere sophistry.
>> The links I added don't suggest lying is bad under the technique - the reverse, in fact.  The recent Canadian press coverage of the Pickton trial talks about the detective pretending that his own mother died of cancer to match the experience of the accused.  This matches my other reading but maybe the Reid Technique as given by the institute forbids lying: I doubt it.  So, anyway, I added "is reported to" ahead of the forbid lying.  I probably should have deleted the line.  If anyone who has had the training or read the book knows then perhaps they can update with the official line.   Tre1234 23:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lying is verboten in the Reid Technique?

message: could some examples be added to make the theory more clear?
>> the HowStuffWorks link is excellently clear.  I included a reference to it but didn't cut-and-paste any of her examples, naturally.  Tre1234 23:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples?

message: I have several problems understanding this article:
* intro states there are three separate and distinct components, yet The Behavior Analysis Interview describes two of them - are they mixed in some way or is the second paragraph misplaced?
* The Reid Nine Steps of Interrogation - what are the nine steps?  >> Added Tre1234 21:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacks clarity 

message: Particularly the following, which desperately needs a citation:
"Many courts have held that the psychological pressure exerted during a Reid interrogation is profound. Effectively the interrogator, in an unrelenting manner, with the conclusion of guilt resolutely formed in his mind, will grind the suspect down, convince him or her that irrespective of their factual innocence, they are guilty."
76.117.108.168 (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is overall fairly subjective. 

message: there was an  article in the new yorker about the problems with the Reid technique. i don't have a subscription so i can't read most of it, but thankfully the author, douglas starr, was on Fresh Air about it.  the interview is over half an hour long, and really interesting (and depressing). there's also a summary of the interview.
link to Fresh Air radio interview.
link to new yorker article.
one of the most shocking points brought up is that one of the early cases that Reid made his name on (1955, Darrell Parker in Lincoln, Nebraska) turned out to be a false confession that didn't get cleared up until 2012. ≈Sensorsweep (talk) 11:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I just read that article this afternoon and intend to add some of its alient points during the next few days to this article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  new article on the problems and pseudoscience. 

message: Is it possible to add a Popular culture section with a reference to a scene in True Detective (episode 5).
In the scene where Cohle interrogates Francis, I believe he is using the Reid technique.
:Only if you find a reputable verifiable source for it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:11, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  In "Popular Culture" 

message: Lisanne Adam, Celine van Golde: Police practice and false confessions: A search for the implementation of investigative interviewing in Australia: 
Abstract
Since the 1960s, the United States developed ‘Reid interrogation technique’, and its variations have been widely usedaround the world. Due to its interrogative and confession-driven nature – and thus the increased risk of false confessions– many countries (including Australia) have since moved away from this model towards the UK-developed PEACE-approach. This article will utilise case studies and forensic psychological research to explain how coercive techniquesused during police interviews increase the risk of false confessions. It will then describe the implementation of inves-tigative interviewing in Australia by presenting an analysis of those state and territory police manuals which are publiclyavailable.
kind regards, Sujalajus (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  literature tip: Police practice and false confessions: A search for the implementation of investigative interviewing in Australia  

message: Text reads:
The psychological system was developed in the United States by John E. Reid in the 1950s, who was a psychologist, polygraph expert and former Chicago police officer.
Per John E. Reid & Associates website:
John E. Reid and Associates, Inc. began developing Investigative Interviewing and Interrogation techniques in 1947
http://www.reid.com/r_about.html
Per the Marshall Project:
The technique was first introduced in the 1940s and 50s by polygraph expert John Reid, who intended it to be a modern-era reform — replacing the beatings that police frequently used to elicit information. 
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2017/03/07/the-seismic-change-in-police-interrogations
Change text to:
The psychological system was developed in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s by John E. Reid, who was a psychologist, polygraph expert and former Chicago police officer.
I'm a book editor and came across this entry while fact-checking a manuscript. It seems this date should be changed, unless someone has additional information?
Bradanini123 (talk) 05:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect date for development of Reid Technique? 

message: Which has then been reverted with a non-sensical response. Saying "also it's not a torture technique" - which is not a claim the edits I made make.
* "it has been a mainstay of police procedure" - given that next to this it says "particuarly in the US", it implies it's a global statement, the nearest cite says nothing of the sort.
* "and Reid's technique had been adopted by law enforcement agencies of many different types" - which I tagged as vague, because like it's vague. The cite says nothing about this and certainly doesn't help to make it any less vague. --81.100.164.154 (talk) 22:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagged some stuff