Article Categories


Confession Motivation: Gain versus Pain

by Stan B. Walters, CSP
“The Lie Guy®”

For each of us, the only reason we change our minds about a decision that we have already made is when someone or something convinces us to abandon our first decision and a new or different point of view.  In our mind in some measurable way, we see the new position we have taken as being more rewarding or satisfying than the old.  We have made the change after we have been motivated by our perception of “gain” or “pain.”  The same evaluation process is being made in the mind of our interview or interrogation subject while we are persuading them to change their current position and begin to cooperate with us and comply with our requests for information or even confession.  If you can understand the “gain” or “pain” motivation of your subject and demonstrate to your subject a big distinction between the two, you’ll have a better chance at gaining compliance, cooperation and confession.


In the Gain vs. Gain scenario, you subject has already concluded that he has much more to gain by remaining consistent with the position he has already assumed.  First you have two hurdles to overcome, your subject’s commitment to staying consistent with his decision and second demonstrating to him or her the position you want them to choose will provide them even more to gain than they may realize. In this case you’ll need to acknowledge that you subject does have some things to gain by sticking with their decision and point out that the new point of view may also have those very same rewards.  That it itself however, is not enough to move your subject.  You’ll have emphasize the advantages your subject has overlooked or has undervalued in terms of their importance to him and his “gain” objective.


In the second scenario which is Pain vs. Pain, there is the possibility that your interviewee has seen no gain for them at all by accepting your conclusions and you’ll have a long road of persuasion ahead of you. It that case you’ll need to demonstrate to the subject that they have overlooked some pain issues with their point of view and to accept your proposition.  Your recommended position may also afford the subject some “pain” but not nearly as much as what they had not anticipated if they decided to “stand” by his initial choice.  In most cases, carefully listening to your subject and their reasons for rejecting your proposal, you’ll hear the gain-pain issue or issues that is driving your subject’s resistance.  You’ll need to focus on those issues because their are important to your subject but may not be that important to you.


The final scenario is usually the easiest to deal with and that’s the Pain vs. Gain format.  In this case, it is much easier to convince your subject to abandon their choice to resist your recommendations to solve the issue.  They already see themselves has having to deal with some level of “pain” as a result of their behavior and all you have to do is show them the “light” and get them to look forward and see to “gains” they can make by reevaluating their current pain-filled situation.  In many cases, just pointing out what may be obvious “gain” to you is all that is needed because your subject is “blinded” by their current state and has missed the benefits of changing they judgment about the possible outcomes of cooperation.


In any of the three scenarios above, the interviewer has to realize that their subject is motivated by “their” perception of Gain vs Pain.  The evaluation by the subject as to what they define as gain or pain may not even be close to what you as the interviewer think is worth gaining or avoiding.   Once the interviewer recognizes their subject’s gain or pain motivation he can key in on those issues.  The greater the distinction you can make between Gain – Gain, Gain – Pain, and Pain – Pain, the more likely and the more quickly you’ll get the subject to come to the conclusion to abandon their current preferred decision and accept the interviewer’s recommendation.

The Narrative-Based Interview: Filtering Technique

Stan B. Walters, CSP
“The Lie Guy®”

It is now no secret that a narrative-based interview is the most productive and successful interview technique over the more restrictive accusatory style.  Some of the most recent social psychological research has shown that the narrative process generates not only more information but also has the benefit of stimulating more deception cues if the victim, witness or suspect attempts to mislead the interviewer.  Perhaps another side benefit may be that this technique also allows the interviewer to use a progressive “filter” to help isolate those deception cues for further attention during the cross-examination phase of the interview.


The narrative based interview is a four part information recovery system.  After establishing a baseline through an “orientation” effort, the interviewer then creates an environment favorable to allow the person to explain their observations and point of view regarding any incident under inquiry.  The format in and of itself has consistently proven the ability to recover a large amount of raw information from not only a suspect but just as importantly from any victims and / or witnesses.  A larger verbal response creates details and information sufficient for an abundance of follow-up opportunities for the interviewer.


The first level narrative permits the interviewer to “filter” the statement for any holes, contradictions and inconsistencies in the statement.  The interviewer can now focus his questions on these nuggets to an attempt to clarify the information and make an assessment as to whether the isolated information is the result of an apparent attempt to deceive through omission or embellishment.


The final step allows the interviewer to use cross-examination to probe the further filtered contents for the most significant key topics that triggered to largest response from the subject as demonstrated by the subject’s reactions of Anger, Depression, Denial, and Bargaining and ultimately leading the possibly deceptive subject to compliance or admission and confession.


A key tool of Practical Kinesic Interview & Interrogation® is the information recovery aspect of the narrative interview.  The narrative process is however far more valuable than just a tool to obtain an initial statement.  Used as a multi-level filtering tool it will help the interviewer identify the main issues and marshal all his efforts to address those issues in order to achieve his final objective – “The Truth.”