Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Scientific Interrogation: The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) Technique Cover

Scientific Interrogation: The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) Technique

Open Access
|Dec 2025

References

  1. Alison, L. J., Alison, E., Shortland, N., & Surmon-Bohr, F. (2020). ORBIT: The science of rapport-based interviewing for law enforcement, security, and military. Oxford University Press.
  2. Anderson, B. J. (2011). Recognizing character: A new perspective on character evidence. Yale LJ, 121, 1912.
  3. Blinkhorn, V. (2023). Witness testimony. In Forensic Psychology, Crime and Policing (pp. 324–329). Policy Press.
  4. Bull, R., & Dando, C. J. (2010). Detecting verbal deception: Strategy versus tactics. Paper presented at the Annual American Psychology and Law Society, 18th–20th March 2010, Vancouver, Canada.
  5. Canter, D. V., & Alison, L. J. (Eds.). (1999). Profiling in policy and practice, networks (pp. 157–188). Offender Profiling Series Vol II. Aldershot.
  6. Cassell, P. G., & Hayman, B. S. (1996). Police interrogation in the 1990s: An empirical study of the effects of Miranda. University of California Law Review, 43, 839–931.
  7. Clemens, F., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., Vrij, A., Landstrom, S., Hjelmsater, E. R. A., & Hartwig, M. (2010). Skulking around the dinosaur: Eliciting cues to children’s deception via strategic disclosure of evidence. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(7), 925–940. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1597
  8. Clemens, F. (2013). Detecting lies about past and future actions: The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique and suspects’ strategies (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  9. Clemens, F., Granhag, P. A., & Stromwall, L. A. (2013). Counter‐interrogation strategies when anticipating questions on intentions. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 10(1), 125–138.
  10. Clemens, F., & Grolig, T. (2019). Innocent of the crime under investigation: Suspects’ counter-interrogation strategies and statement-evidence inconsistency in strategic vs. non-strategic interviews. Psychology, Crime & Law, 25(10), 945–962.
  11. Colwell, K., Hiscock-Anisman, C., Memon, A., Woods, D., & Michlik, P. M. (2006). Strategies of impression management among deceivers and truth-tellers: How liars attempt to convince. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 24(2), 31–38.
  12. Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. A., & Stromwall, L. A. (2018). Police officers’ perceptions of statement inconsistency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(5), 644–665.
  13. Feather, N. T. (1999). Judgments of deservingness: Studies in the psychology of justice and achievement. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 86–107.
  14. Fisher, R. P., Vrij, A., & Leins, D. A. (2012). Does testimonial inconsistency indicate memory inaccuracy and deception? Beliefs, empirical research, and theory. In Applied issues in investigative interviewing, eyewitness memory, and credibility assessment (pp. 173–189). New York, NY: Springer New York.
  15. Ford, J. D., Grasso, D. J., Elhai, J. D., & Courtois, C. A. (2015). Posttraumatic stress disorder: Scientific and professional dimensions. Academic press.
  16. Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., Gilin, D., & White, J. B. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent: The differential effects of perspective taking and empathy in negotiations. Psychological science, 19(4), 378–384.
  17. Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). The illusion of transparency: Biased assessments of others’ ability read one’s emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 332–346.
  18. Granhag, P.A. (November 18–19, 2010). The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique: A scientific perspective. High Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG; FBI). HIG Research Symposium: Interrogation in the European Union, Washington, DC.
  19. Granhag, P. A., Andersson, L. O., Stromwall, L. A., & Hartwig, M. (2004). Imprisoned knowledge: Criminal’s beliefs about deception. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9, 103–119.
  20. Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2008). A new theoretical perspective on deception detection: On the psychology of instrumental mind-reading. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14(3), 189–200.
  21. Granhag, P. A., Clemens, F., & Stromwall, L. A. (2009). The usual and the unusual suspects: Level of suspicion and counter‐interrogation tactics. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 6(2), 129–137.
  22. Granhag, P.A., 2010. The strategic use of evidence (SUE) technique: a scientific perspective. Presented at the High Value Detainee Interrogation Group (FBI) Research Symposium: Interrogation in the European Union, Washington, DC.
  23. Granhag, P. A. (2010, November). The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique: A scientific perspective. In Washington, DC, USA: High Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG, FBI). HIG Research Symposium: Interrogation in the European Union.
  24. Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., Willen, R. M., & Hartwig, M. (2013). Eliciting cues to deception by tactical disclosure of evidence: The first test of the Evidence Framing Matrix. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18(2), 341–355.
  25. Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2015). The strategic use of evidence technique: A conceptual overview. In P. A. Granhag, A. Vrij, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Detecting deception: Current challenges and cognitive approaches (pp. 231–251). Wiley-Blackwell.
  26. Granhag, P. A., Kleinman, S., & Oleszkiewicz, S. (2016). The Scharff technique: On how to effectively elicit intelligence from human sources. International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 29(1), 132–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/08850607.2015.1083341
  27. Hafer, C. L., & Begue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167.
  28. Hartwig, M. (2005). Interrogating to detect deception and truth: Effects of strategic use of evidence.
  29. Hartwig, M., & Granhag, P. A. (2023). Strategic use of evidence: A review of the technique and its principles. In G. E. Oxburgh, T. Myklebust, M. Fallon, & M. Hartwig (Eds.), Interviewing and interrogation: A review of research and practice since World War II (pp. 299–318). Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118510001.ch10.
  30. Hartwig, M., & Voss, J. A. (2017). Lie detection guide: Theory and practice for investment professionals. Career Resources.
  31. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., & Kronkvist, O. (2006). Strategic use of evidence during police interviews: when training to detect deception works. Law and human behavior, 30(5), 603.
  32. Hartwig, M., Anders Granhag, P., & Stromwall, L. A. (2007). Guilty and innocent suspects’ strategies during police interrogations. Psychology, Crime & Law, 13(2), 213–227.
  33. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., & Doering, N. (2010). Impression and information management: On the strategic self-regulation of innocent and guilty suspects. The Open Criminology Journal, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.2174/1874917801003010010
  34. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L., Wolf, A. G., Vrij, A., & Hjelmsater, E. R. A. (2011). Detecting deception in suspects: Verbal cues as a function of interview strategy. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17(7), 643–656. http://doi:10.1080/10683160903446982
  35. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P.A. (2023). “Strategic Use of Evidence: A Review of the Technique and Its Principles”, in Gavin E. Oxburgh, Trond Myklebust, Mark Fallon and Maria Hartwig (editors), Interviewing and Interrogation: A Review of Research and Practice Since World War II, Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher, Brussels.
  36. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., and Luke, T. J. (2014). “Strategic use of evidence during investigative interviews: the state of the science,” in Credibility Assessment: Scientific Research an Applications, eds D. C. Raskin, C. R. Honts, and J. C. Kircher (Oxford: Academic Press), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394433-7.00001-4
  37. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., & Doering, N. (2010). Impression and information management: On the strategic self-regulation of innocent and guilty suspects. The Open Criminology Journal, 3(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874917801003010010
  38. Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., & Kronkvist, O. (2006). Strategic use of evidence during police interviews: When training to detect deception works. Law and Human Behavior, 30(5), 603–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9053-9
  39. Heller, K. J. (2006). The cognitive psychology of circumstantial evidence. Michigan Law Review, 241–305.
  40. Hilgendorf, E. L., & Irving, B. (1981). A decision-making model of confessions. In Psychology in legal contexts: Applications and limitations (pp. 67–84). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  41. Hindi, I., Mordi, H., Tener, D., & Katz, C. (2022). How does religiosity affect the richness of child forensic testimonies? Comparing the narratives of sexual abuse victims from three Jewish groups in Israel. Children and youth services review, 137, 106488.
  42. Justice, B. P., Bhatt, S., Brandon, S. E., & Kleinman, S. M. (2010). Army field manual 2-22.3: Interrogation methods: A science-based review. Washington, DC (Draft, September).
  43. Kassin, S. M., & Norwick, R. J. (2004). Why people waive their Miranda rights: The power of innocence. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 211–221.
  44. Lacy, J. W., & Stark, C. E. (2013). The neuroscience of memory: implications for the courtroom. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(9), 649–658.
  45. Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York, NY: Plenum.
  46. Luke, T. J. (2021). A meta-analytic review of experimental tests of the interrogation technique of Hanns Joachim Scharff. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(2), 360–373. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/yxpja
  47. Luke, T. J., & Granhag, P. A. (2021, September 7). The Shift-of-Strategy (SoS) approach: A laboratory test. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MFUS8
  48. Luke, T. J., & Granhag, P. A. (2022). The Shift-of-Strategy (SoS) approach: Using evidence strategically to influence suspects’ counter-interrogation strategies. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1–26. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2022.2030738
  49. Luke, T. J., Hartwig, M., Brimbal, L., Chan, G., Jordan, S., Joseph, E., Osborne, J., & Granhag, P. A. (2013). Interviewing to elicit cues to deception: Improving strategic use of evidence with general-to-specific framing of evidence. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 28(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-012-9113-7
  50. Luke, T. J., Hartwig, M., Brimbal, L., & Granhag, P. A. (2017). Building a case: The role of empirically based interviewing techniques in case construction. In H. Otgaar, & M. Howe (Eds.), Finding the truth in the courtroom: Dealing with deception, lies and, memories (pp. 187–208). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190612016.003.0009
  51. Luke, T. J., Dawson, E., Hartwig, M., & Granhag, P. A. (2014). How awareness of possible evidence induces forthcoming counter‐interrogation strategies. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(6), 876–882.
  52. Luke, T. J., Hartwig, M., Joseph, E., Brimbal, L., Chan, G., Dawson, E., Jordan, S., Donovan, P., & Granhag, P. A. (2016). Training in the Strategic Use of Evidence technique: Improving deception detection accuracy of American law enforcement officers. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 31, 270–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-015-9187-0
  53. Masip, J., & Herrero, C. (2015). New approaches in deception detection II. Active interviewing strategies and contextual information. Papeles del Psiclogo, 36(2), 96–108.
  54. May, L., Granhag, P. A., & Tekin, S. (2017). Interviewing suspects in denial: On how different evidence disclosure modes affect the elicitation of new critical information. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 1154.
  55. McDougall, A. J., & Bull, R. (2015). Detecting truth in suspect interviews: The effect of use of evidence (early and gradual) and time delay on Criteria-Based Content Analysis, Reality Monitoring and inconsistency within suspect statements. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(6), 514–530.
  56. Murillas, G. G. M. (2022). Crime Scene Reconstruction. Manual of Crime Scene Investigation, 15–48.
  57. Neequaye, D. A., & Luke, T. J. (2018). Management of disclosure-costs in intelligence interviews. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240635
  58. Nieuwkamp, R., & Mergaerts, L. (2022). Alibi assessment and believability across different legal systems and cultural contexts. In Alibis and corroborators: Psychological, criminological, and legal perspectives (pp. 75–86). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  59. Oleszkiewicz, S., Granhag, P. A., & Cancino Montecinos, S. (2014). The Scharff-technique: Eliciting intelligence from human sources. Law and human behavior, 38(5), 478.
  60. Oleszkiewicz, S., & Watson, S. J. (2021). A meta‐analytic review of the timing for disclosing evidence when interviewing suspects. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(2), 342–359.
  61. Polman, S. (2021). The Influence of Evidence Disclosure Timing and Strength on Statement-Evidence Inconsistencies, Within-Statement Inconsistencies and Information Disclosure by Mock Suspects (Master’s thesis, University of Twente).
  62. Savitsky, K., & Gilovich, T. (2003). The illusion of transparency and the alleviation of speech anxiety. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39618–625.
  63. Shepherd, E & Griffiths, A (2013). Investigative Interviewing: The Conversation Management Approach. OUP Oxford.
  64. Soufan, A. H. (2011). The black banners: The inside story of 9/11 and the war against Al-Qaeda. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
  65. Srivatsav, M. (2019). Determinants of Guilty Suspects’ Behavior in Investigative Interviews: Evidence-Disclosure Tactics and Question Content.
  66. Srivatsav, M., Luke, T. J., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L., & Vrij, A. (2019). What to Reveal and what to Conceal? An Empirical Examination of Guilty Suspects’ Strategies. Unpublished manuscript.
  67. Strömwall, L.A., Hartwig, M., & Granhag, P.A. (2006). To act truthfully: Nonverbal behaviour and strategies during a police interrogation. Psychology, Crime and Law, 12, 207–219.
  68. Suchotzki, K. (2018). Challenges for the application of reaction time-based deception detection methods. In J. P. Rosenfeld (Ed.), Detecting concealed information and deception: Recent developments (pp. 243–268). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812729-2.00011-2
  69. Tekin, S. (2016). Eliciting admissions from suspects in criminal investigations. Student thesis: Doctoral Thesis.
  70. Tekin, S. (2022). Interviewing suspects with the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique. In The Future of Forensic Psychology: Core Topics and Emerging Trends (pp. 105–113). Routledge.
  71. Tekin, S., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., Mac Giolla, E., Vrij, A., & Hartwig, M. (2015). Interviewing strategically to elicit admissions from guilty suspects. Law and Human Behavior, 39, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000131
  72. Tekin, S. (2016). Eliciting admissions from suspects in criminal investigations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Available at https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/44452/4/gupea_2077_44452_4.pdf.
  73. Tekin, S., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L. A., and Vrij, A. (2016). How to make perpetrators in denial disclose more information about their crimes. Psychol. Crime Law 22, 561–580. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2016.1168425
  74. Verigin, B. L., Meijer, E. H., Bogaard, G., & Vrij, A. (2019). Lie prevalence, lie characteristics and strategies of self-reported good liars. PloS one, 14(12), e0225566.
  75. Verigin, B. L., Meijer, E. H., Vrij, A., & Zauzig, L. (2020). The interaction of truthful and deceptive information. Psychology, Crime & Law, 26(4), 367–383.
  76. Vorauer, J. D., & Claude, S.-D. (1998). Perceived versus actual transparency of goals in negotiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 371–385.
  77. Vredeveldt, A., van Koppen, P. J., & Granhag, P. A. (2014). The inconsistent suspect: A systematic review of different types of consistency in truth tellers and liars. Investigative interviewing, 183–207.
  78. Vredeveldt, A., van Koppen, P. J., & Granhag, P. A. (2014). The inconsistent suspect: A systematic review of different types of consistency in truth tellers and liars. In R. Bull (Ed.), Investigative interviewing (pp. 183–207). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9642-7_10
  79. Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and its implications for professional practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
  80. Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2011). Outsmarting the liars: Toward a cognitive lie detection approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410391245
  81. Vrij, A., & Fisher, R. P. (2016). Which lie detection tools are ready for use in the criminal justice system? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(3), 302–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.06.014
  82. Vrij, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2006). Interviewing to detect deception. Offenders’ memories of violent crimes, 279–304.
  83. Vrij, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(2), 110–117.
  84. Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., Ashkenazi, T., Ganis, G., Leal, S., & Fisher, R. P. (2022). Verbal lie detection: its past, present and future. Brain Sciences, 12(12), 1644. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12121644
  85. Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., Kleinman, S. M., & Ashkenazi, T. (2023). The Present and Future of Verbal Lie Detection. In D. DeMatteo & K. C. Scherr (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Psychology and Law (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197649138.013.33
  86. Walsh, D., & Bull, R. (2015). Interviewing suspects: Examining the association between skills, questioning, evidence disclosure, and interview outcomes. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(7), 661–680
  87. Walton, D., & Reed, C. (2008). Evaluating corroborative evidence. Argumentation, 22, 531–553.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ep-2025-0010 | Journal eISSN: 2380-0550 | Journal ISSN: 1898-5238
Language: English
Page range: 59 - 90
Published on: Dec 31, 2025
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Eduardo Pérez-Campos Mayoral, Mark Severino, Haneen Deeb, Pär Anders Granhag, Eduardo L. Perez-Campos, Maria Hartwig, Mark Fallon, published by Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.