Critical and Major Incident Psychology, University of Liverpool.
Am Psychol. 2017 Apr;72(3):266-277. doi: 10.1037/amp0000064.
This review begins with the historical context of harsh interrogation methods that have been used repeatedly since the Second World War. This is despite the legal, ethical and moral sanctions against them and the lack of evidence for their efficacy. Revenge-motivated interrogations (Carlsmith & Sood, 2009) regularly occur in high conflict, high uncertainty situations and where there is dehumanization of the enemy. These methods are diametrically opposed to the humanization process required for adopting rapport-based methods-for which there is an increasing corpus of studies evidencing their efficacy. We review this emerging field of study and show how rapport-based methods rely on building alliances and involve a specific set of interpersonal skills on the part of the interrogator. We conclude with 2 key propositions: (a) for psychologists to firmly maintain the Hippocratic Oath of "first do no harm," irrespective of perceived threat and uncertainty, and (b) for wider recognition of the empirical evidence that rapport-based approaches work and revenge tactics do not. Proposition (a) is directly in line with fundamental ethical principles of practice for anyone in a caring profession. Proposition (b) is based on the requirement for psychology to protect and promote human welfare and to base conclusions on objective evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record
这篇综述首先回顾了自第二次世界大战以来反复使用的严厉审讯方法的历史背景。尽管这些方法在法律、伦理和道德上受到禁止，而且没有证据表明它们有效，但仍有人出于报复动机进行审讯（Carlsmith 和 Sood，2009）。这种审讯经常发生在高冲突、高不确定性的情况下，以及对敌人进行非人性化的情况下。这些方法与建立融洽关系所需的人性化过程截然相反，而越来越多的研究证据表明后者是有效的。我们回顾了这一新兴研究领域，并展示了融洽关系方法如何依赖于建立联盟，并涉及审讯员特定的一系列人际技能。最后我们提出了两个关键命题：（a）无论感知到的威胁和不确定性如何，心理学家都应坚定地遵守希波克拉底誓言“首先不伤害”；（b）更广泛地认识到基于融洽关系的方法有效的实证证据，而报复策略则无效。命题（a）直接符合任何关怀职业从业者的基本伦理实践原则。命题（b）基于心理学保护和促进人类福利的要求，并基于客观证据得出结论。
