Psycho-linguistic study of interrogation videos: problems and possible solutions

2687

Abstract

The article examines the problems of studying the investigation video to establish credibility of the evidence, to specify emotional state, individual psychological characteristics and the psychological impact on the person being interrogated. These problems are mostly caused by the lack of a single scientifically-based methodological approach while сurrently used approaches are not developed sufficiently. We propose a fundamentally new scientifically-based psycho-linguistic approach to the study of investigation video, including the analysis of voice and sounding speech, linguistic analysis (the content and form of speech) and psychological analysis. We considered value, subject, object, and objectives of interrogation videos examination. Study of interrogation videos using the current approach is significant from the point of view of criminal law because of admissibility of evidence by the investigators. The expert concept of suggestive interrogate was operationalized on the basis of linguistic and psychological classifications.

General Information

Keywords: study of investigation videos, psycho-linguistic examination, admissibility of evidence, suggestive interrogate.

Journal rubric: Methodological Problems of Legal Psychology

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/psylaw.2015100207

For citation: Gagina O.V., Kuznetsov V.O., Sekerazh T.N. Psycho-linguistic study of interrogation videos: problems and possible solutions [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologiya i pravo = Psychology and Law, 2015. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 93–104. DOI: 10.17759/psylaw.2015100207. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Belkin R.S. Taktika doprosa // E.M. Livshic, R.S. Belkin Taktika sledstvennyh dejstvij. M.: «Novyj Jurist», 1997.176 s.
  2. Bryzgunova E.A. Sredstva vyrazhenija neizvestnogo v voprose (vzaimodejstvie leksiki, konteksta i intonacii) // Russkaja grammatika: nauchnye trudy: v 2 t. / Gl. red. N.Ju. Shvedova. M.: In-t russkogo jazyka im. V.V. Vinogradova, 2005. T. 2. S. 397–401.
  3. Gavrilova N.I. Vlijanie vnushenija na formirovanie svidetel'skih pokazanij. Avtoref. diss. … kand. psihol. nauk. M., 1975. 12 s.
  4. Gagina O.V., Kuznecov V.O. Issledovanie soderzhanija audio- i videozapisej operativnyh i sledstvennyh dejstvij: sovremennoe sostojanie i perspektivy razvitija // Teorija i praktika sudebnoj jekspertizy. 2014. № 1 (33). S. 45–48.
  5. Glazyrin F.V. Psihologija sledstvennyh dejstvij. Volgograd,1983. 76 s.
  6. Gulevich O.A. Psihologicheskie aspekty jurisprudencii. M.: MPSI, 2009. 512 s.
  7. Znakov V.V. Nepravda, lozh' i obman kak problemy psihologii ponimanija // Voprosy psihologii. 1993. № 2. S. 9–16.
  8. Issleduem lozh': Teorii, praktika obnaruzhenija / Pod red. M. L'juisa, K. Saarni. SPb.: Prajm-Evroznak, 2004. 282 s.
  9. Leontev A.A. Prikladnaja psiholingvistika rechevogo obshhenija i massovoj kommunikacii / Pod red. A.S. Markosjan, D.A. Leont'eva, Ju.A. Sorokina. M.: Smysl, 2008. 272 s.
  10. Praktika primenenija ugolovno-processual'nogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii. Aktual'nye voprosy sudebnoj praktiki, rekomendacii sudej Verhovnogo suda RF po primeneniju ugolovno-processual'nogo zakonodatel'stva na osnove novejshej sudebnoj praktiki / Pod red. V.M. Lebedeva. M.: Jurajt, 2013. 1069 s.
  11. Prikladnaja juridicheskaja psihologija / Pod red. A.M. Stoljarenko. M.: Juniti, 2001. 639 s.
  12. Ratinov A.R. Sudebnaja psihologija dlja sledovatelej. M.: Jurlitinform, 1976. 352 s.
  13. Ratinov A.R., Adamov Ju.P. Lzhesvidetel'stvo (proishozhdenie, predotvrashhenie i razoblachenie lozhnyh pokazanij). M.: Jurlitinform, 1976. 90 s.
  14. Russkaja grammatika: nauchnye trudy: v 2 t. / Gl. red. N.Ju. Shvedova. M.: In-t russkogo jazyka im. V.V. Vinogradova , 2005. 1496 s.
  15. Safuanov F.S., Shishkov S.N. Jekspertiza «pravdivosti» pokazanij (Vozmozhnosti psihologicheskoj jekspertizy) [Jelektronnyj resurs] // Zakonnost'. 1992. № 2. S. 13–14.
  16. Sekerazh T.N. Jekspertnye oshibki pri proizvodstve sudebnoj psihologicheskoj jekspertizy // Sudebnaja jekspertiza: tipichnye oshibki / Pod red. E.R. Rossinskoj. M.: Prospekt, 2012. S. 211–222.
  17. Simonenko S.I. Psihologicheskie osnovanija ocenki lozhnosti i pravdivosti soobshhenij // Voprosy psihologii. 1998. № 3. S. 78–84.
  18. Sorokotjagin I.N. Pravovaja i juridicheskaja psihologija (psihologija jurisprudencii). Ekaterinburg:, UrGJuA, 2002. 356 s.
  19. Fraj O. Detekcija lzhi i obmana. SPb.: Prajm-EVROZNAK, 2005. 320 s.
  20. Shapovalov V.A. Metodika opredelenija psihologicheskih priznakov dostovernosti/nedostovernosti pokazanij v juridicheskoj praktike: metod. posobie. K.: Jurist, 2013. 178 s.
  21. Shihancov G.G. Juridicheskaja psihologija. M.: Zercalo, 1998. 352 s.
  22. Jampolskij A.E. Psihologija doprosa podozrevaemogo. Volgograd: VSSh MVD SSSR, 1978. 46 s.

Information About the Authors

Olga V. Gagina, Head of the Expert Department, Ederal Budget Institution Bryansk Forensic Laboratory of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Bryansk, Russia, e-mail: brlse@yandex.ru

Vitaly O. Kuznetsov, PhD in Philology, Head of the Expert Department, Federal Budget Institution Bryansk Forensic Laboratory of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Bryansk, Russia, e-mail: brlse@yandex.ru

Tatiana N. Sekerazh, PhD in Law, Docent, Head, Laboratory of Forensic Psychology, Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7619-6992, e-mail: sekerage@mail.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 13753
Previous month: 63
Current month: 22

Downloads

Total: 2687
Previous month: 7
Current month: 3