Psychological Mechanisms of Spatial Relationships Between Interrogators and Suspects Influencing the Motivation to Confess
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53469/wjimt.2026.09(03).04Keywords:
Interrogation, Spatial relationship, Confession motivation, Interpersonal distance, Psychological mechanismAbstract
The spatial relationship between interrogators and suspects is an important situational factor influencing a suspect’s motivation to confess. Based on interpersonal distance theory, this study decomposed the interrogation spatial relationship into three dimensions: relative distance, relative height, and relative orientation. An eight-condition spatial relationship paradigm was created through a 2×2×2 factorial experimental design. A questionnaire survey was conducted to assess the differential impacts of these conditions on confession motivation. Results indicated significant differences among the eight spatial relationships in facilitating confession motivation (χ²(7)=94.65, p<0.001). Among these, the “lateral-close-equal” spatial relationship had the most pronounced effect (31%), whereas spatial arrangements characterized by the suspect occupying a disadvantageous position had the weakest effect. Psychological mechanism analysis revealed that equal seating arrangements fostered positive emotional experiences by meeting suspects’ needs for respect, reduced psychological distance, and enhanced interpersonal attraction, thereby increasing interrogators’ persuasive effectiveness. Additionally, lateral positioning promoted confessions by reducing feelings of confrontation and satisfying personal space needs. This study provides a theoretical foundation for optimizing interrogation environments and enhancing the scientific basis of interrogation strategies.
References
Gudjonsson G H. The psychology of interrogations and confessions: a handbook[M]. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2003: 130-131.
Bi Xiqian. A Review of Theoretical Research on Pre-Trial Interrogation [M]. Beijing: Masses Publishing House; 1997:151.
Yun Shancheng. Principles of Investigative Interrogation [M]. Beijing: People’s Public Security University of China Press; 2004:99-109.
Zhao Guifen. A Study on the Motivation for Suspects’ Refusal to Confess [J]. Journal of People’s Public Security University of China; 2004(2):106-113.
Liu Moubin. On Interrogation Environment Techniques and Their Effects [J]. Journal of Political Science and Law; 2005,22(5):61-65.
Xu Lingling. Collection of Nonverbal Information in Interpersonal Communication [J]. Information Studies: Theory & Application; 2005,28(5):465-468.
Ye Jianming. Nonverbal Interrogation Strategies [J]. Journal of People’s Public Security University of China; 2001(1):51-54.
Inbau F. E. Interrogation and Confession [M]. Translated by He JH et al. Beijing: Masses Publishing House; 1992:38-39.
Walters S. B. Kinesic interview and interrogation[M]. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1996: 89.
Bi Xiqian. On the Influence of Interpersonal Relationships Between Interrogators and Suspects on Investigative Interrogation [J]. Journal of Guizhou Police Officer Vocational College; 2005,17(3):68-71.
Jin Shenghua. Interpersonal Space and Communication: An Introduction to Micro-Social Ecology [J]. Sociological Research; 1997(1):122-128.
Yu Fang. Interpersonal Psychology from the Perspective of Seating Etiquette [J]. Psychological World, 2000(6): 61.
Jin Shenghua. Social Psychology [M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press; 2005:324-366.
Peng Danling. General Psychology [M]. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press; 2002:323-324.