JPL-2010-38-12-10-DeClue2, Three things that should be used to guide investigative interviews by military and intelligence agencies

The psychological study of investigative interviewing is over 100
years old (Munsterberg, 1908), with a rich literature and body of
knowledge (Drizin and Leo, 2004; Kassin, Drizin, Grisso,
Gudjonsson, Leo, & Redlich, 2009). Although behavioral and
social science has focused primarily on investigations by police,
findings should also be considered by investigators who work for
military or intelligence agencies. The state of the science leads to
at least three recommendations. First, all investigative interviews
should be video-recorded in their entirety, with an equal focus on
interviewers and interviewees. Second, rather than seeing
interrogation as a method to persuade or coerce an uncooperative
subject into confessing, investigators should consider interviews of
suspects, victims, witnesses, and sources as investigative
interviews, with a common goal of finding the truth. Third, because
investigators do not really know which interviewees are guilty
(have guilty knowledge) and which are not (do not), no lawenforcement,
military, or intelligence-agency interrogator should
ever use a technique on a “presumed-guilty” suspect that would not
be appropriate for use with an innocent person.