Adding science-based techniques to a legacy approach isn’t an upgrade — it’s a precision drill sitting in a toolbox full of dull, bent screwdrivers.
We’re at a critical juncture in the evolution of investigative interviewing. The science is clear, the tools are available, and the moral imperative is undeniable — yet implementation remains frustratingly inconsistent across our profession. This isn’t about tweaking what we’ve always done; it’s about fundamentally reimagining how we approach every interview, from initial planning through final documentation.
The transformation starts with brutal honesty about our current practices. Ask yourself: does your interviewing methodology align with your organization’s mission to uncover truth? If interviewer credibility is the cornerstone of successful information gathering, what does it say about our profession when we rely on techniques that modern science has proven unreliable? Every time we choose convenience over science-based practice, we’re not just failing our cases — we’re failing our calling as truth-seekers.
I was listening to The Truth Be Told Podcast with David Thompson for the third time — this episode featuring Dr. Christian Meissner and Dr. Hayley Cleary discussing the critical relationship between researchers and practitioners in investigative interviewing. If you’re in this space and haven’t heard this podcast, you need to. It’s essential listening.
Dr. Meissner’s closing observation stopped me in my tracks. He recounted how a practitioner once thanked him after a presentation, saying “thank you, you gave me some more tools for my toolbox.” But Meissner posed a crucial question that cuts to the heart of our profession:
That observation unveiled what I believe is the most significant issue facing our profession today — and it perfectly captures why I completely transformed my business and practice after 40 years in the field.
When I got my first house over 40 years ago, my dad put together a toolbox for me and filled it with extra tools he had — some old, some worn, some I couldn’t even identify. They weren’t new, but they were free, and I was grateful. Guess what? I still have that toolbox, and frankly, most of those tools are still in it. But here’s the thing — I don’t use them anymore. Why? Because better tools exist. More effective tools. Tools that actually work.
Here’s what hit me: I received that toolbox from my dad at about the same time I was being trained in investigative interviewing. Both happened over 40 years ago. The techniques I learned then are as old as those tools in my dusty toolbox — and about as useful for today’s challenges. There are newer and better tools available. So why haven’t we switched?
For decades, I used what we now call “legacy” interviewing practices. I taught them to thousands of investigators. I was successful with them — or so I thought. But mounting research revealed an uncomfortable truth: many of these traditional approaches weren’t just ineffective, they were often harmful. They could contaminate information, damage relationships, and in the worst cases, contribute to wrongful convictions.
After my wife’s death, while channeling my grief into completely redefining what Anderson Investigative Associates would become, I faced Dr. Meissner’s question head-on. I couldn’t just add science-based techniques to my existing toolkit — I had to throw out the entire approach and start over. And I should say, this doesn’t apply only to interviewing; I also had to examine other areas of my life. I’d encourage you to do the same.
The biggest challenge wasn’t logistical, although the logistical side has been a monumental task — it was psychological. I had to accept that practices I’d relied on for over 30 years were fundamentally flawed. I had to admit that despite my federal credentials and decades of experience, I’d been doing it wrong. That required destroying my professional ego and rebuilding from the ground up.
Many in our field are struggling with this same question. Companies, law enforcement agencies, and investigative entities want to add science-based techniques to their existing practices. But that’s like putting a precision drill in a toolbox full of dull, bent screwdrivers and calling it upgraded.
You can’t do science-based interviewing part-time. You can’t use rapport-building techniques in one interview and coercive tactics in the next. You can’t embrace cognitive interviewing principles while maintaining confrontational approaches as backup options. The science doesn’t work that way. The ethics don’t work that way.
Just as I don’t use those old, worn tools from my dad’s original toolbox anymore, we need to stop using investigative techniques that research has proven ineffective or harmful — no matter how traditional they are, no matter how we were trained, no matter how uncomfortable change feels.
I’m actually thinking of dusting off that old toolbox and bringing it to my next training session. It would be a powerful visual reminder of why we can’t just keep adding new tools while ignoring the broken ones collecting dust.
So here’s my challenge to you:
The research is overwhelming. The science is clear. The question isn’t whether we need better tools — it’s whether we have the courage to throw out what doesn’t work and completely rebuild our approach around what does.
What’s in your toolbox that needs to go?
Training is a first step. It is what moved me beyond my blind spots, at least some of them. I can provide the training or recommend providers teaching science-based techniques. Do your research, find the right provider, and maximize your training dollar investment. If you are a practitioner or a leader, don’t settle for the same old legacy-based methods that have no empirical evidence supporting them. If you are in leadership, you carry the same responsibility to know and apply these standards and to find training content that maximizes your team’s effectiveness and accomplishes your mission.
Anderson Investigative Associates is positioned to custom-tailor science-based training to your specific needs. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the subject of this imperative transition, or any training need, please reach out. Additional issues pertaining to interviewing, auditing, and investigations can be found in other blogs and videos that we have produced and are contained in most blocks of instruction that our company presents.
If you have additional questions, comments, or an interview topic you would like me to address, just let me know. In the meantime, be well, stay safe out there, and start investing in a transition that is ethical and effective. It will improve everything you do. It’s time to improve your interviewing and communication skills, not just in interviews, but throughout your life. If you need help getting ready, I know who could help.