PhD title: Sensemaking and cooperation in interrogations: The role of matching

The main topic of my thesis relates to interpersonal sensemaking (how people make sense of others' motivations and desires) and the potential positive effects of motivational alignment/coordination in interrogation and intelligence settings. Specifically, the main research question of the PhD is whether it is possible to increase trust and cooperation in interrogations through the alignment and coordination of motivational frames. The research is based on the cylindrical model of communication behaviours, developed by Taylor (2002). The model hypothesises that when communicating, people tend to focus on either instrumental, relational, or identity concerns.
Previous research has shown matching of these motivational frames to be associated with positive interaction outcomes. However, much of this research was correlational in nature, meaning it was impossible to tease out the causal link between matching and cooperation. By employing carefully designed experiments, the aim of this project is to deliver this evidence.
The first study (conducted between Apr 2020-Aug 2020) was experimental and sought to demonstrate whether it was possible to manipulate motivational frame matching in order to increase trust and cooperation in an online interrogation situation. The results were mixed but indicated that interrogator matching led to more participant matching, but only in the beginning of the interview.
The second study (conducted between Sep 2020-in progress) was based on interrogation transcripts from the US Air Force. The aim was to validate and extend a previous model (the cylinder model) developed by Taylor (2002) for crisis negotiations, to help explain interpersonal interactions in interrogation situations. Initially, the transcripts were coded on a thought unit level of analysis according to a pre-developed coding scheme. This was validated by second coding approximately 51% of the transcripts. The agreement between coders were satisfactory (Cohen's kappa = .73). Similar to Taylor (2002), the analysis will employ smallest space analysis to see whether the cylindrical model of communication also is present in these military interrogations.
The third study (conducted between Apr 2021-Jun 2021) was similar to study two. However, instead of having participants take the role of the suspect, they now imagined being the suspect. This meant that it was possible to construct completely matched and completely non-matched interactions. In addition, we also manipulated the orientation taken towards the interaction (cooperative vs. competitive). It was found that motivational frame matching led to significantly higher levels of feeling understood and identify with the interviewer, but only for an interaction that was cooperative. For a competitive interaction, motivational frame matching actually led to less willingness to provide information, identity, and trust the interviewer.
The fourth study (currently being planned) will likely seek to explore what happens in interactions that are matched but where the adopted orientation of the suspect and interviewer is different. For example, the suspect adopting a competitive orientation while the interviewer adopts a cooperative orientation. Understanding the role of matching in these situations ought to be important in order to find ways to handle competitive or uncooperative suspects. While it could be hypothesised that motivational frame matching would be effective at turning a competitive suspect around into a more cooperative orientation, this has not been experimentally demonstrated before.
Finally, there are plans for a fifth study to investigate whether it is possible to manipulate/prime participants' motivations and then look at the effect of matching vs. nonmatching.
In sum, the PhD will revolve around the cylinder model (Taylor, 2002) and how cooperation can be encouraged through interpersonal sensemaking.