Duke, M. C. and Van Puyvelde, D. (2017) What science can teach us about “Enhanced Interrogation”. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 30(2), pp. 310-339. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/144452/ Deposited on: 25 July 2017 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk Science and “Enhanced Interrogation” What Science Can Teach Us about “Enhanced Interrogation” Misty C. Duke Damien Van Puyvelde National Security Studies Institute, The University of Texas at El Paso Send correspondence to Misty C. Duke, National Security Studies Institute, University of Texas at El Paso, 500 W. University Avenue, Kelly Hall, El Paso, TX, 79968. Email:
[email protected]. THE SCIENCE OF INTERROGATION 1 Abstract The recent Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on the CIA Detention and Interrogation Program sheds light on the practice of “enhanced interrogation” while countering CIA claims about the effectiveness of these methods. This article relies on the science of interrogation to evaluate those claims. Five hypotheses about the (in)effectiveness of “enhanced interrogation techniques” are generated based upon empirical research on interrogation practices. The article concludes that evidence-based, non-coercive methods of interrogation are likely to be more, or equally, as effective as “enhanced interrogation” in obtaining accurate information from detainees. THE SCIENCE OF INTERROGATION 2 In November 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) released a report on its inquiry into the Detainee and Interrogation Program conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).1 The report describes how the CIA detained 119 prisoners and subjected 39 of them to methods dubbed “enhanced interrogation techniques” (EIT).