- Sponsored By -

HUMAN FACTORS:

Threat & Error Management

RESEARCH STATISTICS REVEAL THAT OVER 85% OF ALL PRIMARY CAUSE FACTORS IN MISHAPS ARE RELATED TO HUMAN ERROR.

Human Factors training provides participants with a key set of individual and team-based risk management skills and strategies that have been developed to reduce human error and enhance teamwork in high-risk settings. Your organization can use these proven strategies to effectively reduced negative incidents and mishaps which can lead to a significant reduction in litigation and associated expenses.  The program is essential in developing an understanding of the nature of human behavior with respect to error and emphasizes a pro-active response to error discovery and/or threat of human error within an organization.    Designed for both management and line employees.

RELEVANT FOR A BROAD RANGE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND NON-LE PROFESSIONALS INCLUDING:

Sworn Officers   Dispatch    SWAT    Critical Incident Teams    Rangers    Police Psychologists    Internal Affairs    Police Trainers    Administration    Fire    EMTs     Aviation Crews 

Participants learn how to apply the principles of TEM to predict and identify human error potential encountered in law enforcement, military and aviation operations, and emergency situations.

Topics of discussion include Organizational Culture, The Human Factor, Stress and Performance, Fatigue, Decision Making, Effective Communications in High Stakes Situations, and Leadership Skills.

Tuition ranges from $205 to $250 depending on location.

CA POST PLAN 3, fully reimbursable, #1095-10801-15005, and STC Certified, #8803-072916

 TOPICS INCLUDE SOME OF THE MOST PERTINENT ISSUES FACING LAW ENFORCEMENT TODAY:

• How does organizational culture affect behavior and how do we change culture as LE evolves.
• How we can discover the active and latent conditions that lead to catastrophic or simple error.
• How does acute and chronic stress affect our work force.
• How complacency develops in individuals and organizations.
• How we can calculate and counter the effects of fatigue.
• How we can improve our decision making process to be less reactive and more calculative.
• What human factors impact on our decision making (Attention, situational awareness, and mental schema/models)?
• How we can communicate more effectively.
• Why we must all demonstrate leadership.
• Effective briefings and de-briefings.
• Characteristics of high performing organizations.

COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

• Understand how organizational culture affects behavior in the workplace.
• Trace the cause of a mishap to determine the root cause of both active and latent errors.
• Predict the level of performance based on varying levels of stress.
• Describe complacency and what measures we can use to mitigate it.
• Calculate the level of impairment due to hours of wakefulness and sleep loss.
• Describe how we can develop a level of unconscious competence in our performance.
• Trace the decision making process through the OODA loop and explain the factors that go into each step.
• Describe the three behavioral styles of communication.
• Prepare an assertive message that clearly gets the point across without coming across as aggressive, challenging to a position or authority, or questioning their judgment.
• Compare and contrast designated vs. functional leadership.

Leading Human Performance Analyst, Craig E. Geis, (LTC. Ret.) MBA, MA, is Co-Founder of California Training Institute and director of curriculum development and training. Craig has extensive background in risk management and Human Factors Threat & Error Management. LTC. Geis was a career army pilot, developed the military's Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program to address human error, and is a former instructor for the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, University of Maryland, and the University of San Francisco. He has served as an Associate Professor at the University of Southern California, providing instruction in numerous courses on Safety Management and Human Factors. Craig holds an M.A. in Psychology from Austin Peay State University, a B.A. in Management from C.W. Post College in New York, and an MBA in Management from Georgia Southern College.  At the time of his military retirement, Lt. Col. Geis was the US Army's Lead Safety Specialist in Aviation Human Factors.

 Tuition ranges from $205 to $250 depending on location.

CA POST PLAN 3, fully reimbursable, #1095-10801-15005, and STC Certified, #8803-072916

Homeland Security Grant Program funds may be available to cover registration, travel, lodging, per-diem, and over-time.  https://www.dhs.gov/state-homeland-security-and-emergency-services to find your state representative.

Interrogation Themes: 5 Strategies for Selecting Interrogation Themes  

March-April 2016 

(Please Note: If you wish to print and share an Investigator Tip with your colleagues, the John E. Reid 'credit and permission' statement following the article must be included.)

by Louis Senese 

Identifying the most effective arguments to present to a suspect during an interrogation will help you elicit the truth

A frequent question I'm asked by cops during my interviewing and interrogation training programs is, "What if I'm using the wrong interrogation theme?" This is often followed by, "How do I change themes? And if I'm using the wrong theme, won't the suspect know that I'm not sure that he committed the crime?"

Answer: No.

In the course of your interrogation, the suspect's responses will help you choose your themes. Strategies for interrogation theme selection include:

1. Case facts and motive
   
2. The suspect's statements during the interview
   
3. Common sense
   
4. Prior similar case experiences
   
5. Training and education

Example case: assaulting Isabella

The following scenario is based on an actual case. Jacob, age 26, babysat his 25-year-old girlfriend Sophia's 4-year-old daughter, Isabella. At the last minute, Sophia asked Jacob if he could watch Isabella that evening because her mother just called to say she couldn't babysit. He agreed and arrived moments later at 1700 hours, and Sophia immediately left for work. She returned at about 2300 hours from waitressing, and Isabella was sleeping.
The next morning, Isabella told her that Jacob gave her a bath because she wanted to play with her toys in the bathtub.

Isabella then said, "Mommy, when Jacob gave me my bath, he kept putting his finger in and out of my pee-pee hole and asked me how it felt. It was a long , and it hurt. Why did he do that, Mommy?"

Sophia talked to Jacob, and he admitted giving Isabella a bath for the first time, but denied ever inserting his finger in Isabella's vagina. Sophia reported this incident to the police.

Following the theme selection strategies listed above, there are more than 10 probable themes for the interrogation of Jacob. These theme approaches will be italicized in the following text.

Case Facts Theme Analysis

A sexual act occurred between an adult and a 4-year-old girl. The victim knew the suspect and acknowledged that this was the only time he did this to her. We will use the one time vs. many times as a theme and also suggest that it was more spontaneous vs. planned, as the suspect was asked by the mother to babysit the child on short notice. Additionally, we could further minimize the behavior by acknowledging that the suspect did not initiate the act, since the victim asked for a bath.

Interview Theme Analysis

During his interview, Jacob denied committing the act - but when asked, the key Reid behavior-provoking questions his responses were as follows:

1. Did you insert your finger in Isabella's vagina? "No way, I was careful about that."
   
2. Is it possible your finger might have accidently slipped into her vagina when you were washing her? "Anything is possible, but I doubt it."
   
3. Why would she be saying this? "Because I punished her by turning off the TV."
   
4. What should happen to an adult if he did something like this? "I really don't know. I'm not a psychologist or anything like that. Maybe find out why he did it."
   
5. If an adult did this, do you think he would deserve a second chance? "I don't know. No one is perfect, and we all deserve second chances."
   
6. If an adult did something like this, why do you think he would have done it? "I don't know, maybe just curious or something."
   
7. Tell me why you wouldn't do something like this? "Because it's against the law."
   
8. You mentioned earlier that we all deserve a second chance. If an adult did sexually touch a child, under what circumstances should he be given a second chance? "Maybe if it was the only time they did something like that."

Jacob has given us a psychologically, not legally, acceptable motive to incorporate as a theme -- curiosity. He has also provided a minimizing face-saver by saying that an offender in this case should be considered for a second chance if it was only one time. Isabella said he inserted his finger in her vagina, which could then be contrasted with sexual intercourse, further minimizing his behavior. We could further minimize his behavior by contrasting seconds vs. minutes, as well as suggesting that he stopped because he realized he was hurting her and that his behavior was improper.

Further, contrasting removing his finger within a minute when she said it began to hurt and not keeping it in for 30 minutes demonstrates that he realized his mistake. Also, the investigator can contrast the subject inserted his finger only partially vs. all the way.

Common Sense Theme Analysis

In this case we could shift the blame to his girlfriend for asking him at the last moment to babysit. We could also blame the victim for asking him to bathe her -- something he has never done before, thereby further suggesting the act was spontaneous and motivated by curiosity.

Prior Similar Case Theme Analysis

The investigator can establish his credibility by relating this situation to prior comparable cases. Ideally, the investigator should present similar but much more serious cases to the suspect. This serves to minimize the offender's conduct and show that it is not unique.

Training and Education

John E. Reid and Associates has been presenting this training throughout the world since 1974, and our text, "Criminal Interrogation and Confessions," has been cited twice by the U.S. Supreme Court in the context of proper interrogation procedures.

Together with tactical training at the department level, the Reid educational protocol provides a level of competence to the law enforcement professional upon which each officer can confidently rely when formulating and executing an interrogation strategy, including theme selection.

At every training program I am approached by cops who say that after viewing our interrogations, "I now see where I made my mistakes and should have gone the other way."
Another comment I always hear is, "I wish I had this training earlier in my career."

Conclusion

It is generally not one theme that the suspect needs to hear but a variety-- all of which tap into a collection of elements or unique circumstances relating to the crime. By following the theme selection strategies described above, the investigator is able to identify the most effective arguments to present to a suspect during an interrogation to elicit the truth.

We are always observing our suspect's verbal, nonverbal and paralinguistic behavior to assist our evaluation of which among the themes seems to strike a positive chord with the suspect. That observation, in turn, guides the investigator to further develop that theme.
When transitioning from one theme to another, say to the suspect, "And another reason I'm talking to you is because I also think this happened because ..."and introduce the next theme.

Presenting multiple relatable themes creates an emotional environment that simultaneously:

a. Validates the improper behavior, and
b. Suggests a variety of psychologically -- yet not legally -- acceptable rationalizations that allow a perpetrator to save face while admitting the truth.

In this case, the suspect admitted the act, and when asked, drew an outline of his hand on paper, identified what finger he used and drew a line on it to show how far it was inserted, then signed the sketch.

About the author

Louis C. Senese, Vice President of John E. Reid and Associates, Inc. and has been employed at the firm since 1974. He received his BS in business from Northern Illinois University and his MS from Reid College. Lou has personally conducted in excess of eight thousand interviews and interrogations and has testified in federal and state courts as well as employment hearings. 

Credit and Permission Statement:
Permission is hereby granted to those who wish to share or copy this article. In those instances, the following Credit Statement must be included "This Investigator Tip was developed by John E. Reid and Associates Inc. 800-255-5747 / www.reid.com." Inquiries regarding Investigator Tips should be directed to Janet Finnerty jfinnerty@reid.com.