Accusatorial vs Information-Gathering Interrogation

By Murder Book Editorial TeamPublished by Gungrounds, the studio making Murder BookPublished 3 October 2026Updated 3 October 2026

Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation represent two fundamentally different ways of questioning a suspect. Accusatorial methods, such as the Reid Technique widely used in North America, start from a presumption of guilt and use psychological pressure to secure a confession. Information-gathering methods, such as the PEACE model developed in England and Wales, treat the interview as a search for accurate information and rely on rapport, open questions and evidence-based probing. A 2014 meta-analysis by Meissner and colleagues found that information-gathering approaches produced more true confessions and significantly fewer false confessions than accusatorial techniques.

Key takeaways

Accusatorial interrogation assumes guilt and uses confrontation, minimisation and sometimes deception to obtain a confession.
Information-gathering interviewing assumes nothing and uses rapport, open questions and structured evidence disclosure to obtain a reliable account.
A meta-analysis of laboratory and field studies found that information-gathering methods increased true confessions and reduced false confessions compared with accusatorial approaches.
Several countries have moved from accusatorial models to information-gathering frameworks, led by England and Wales in the 1990s.
No interview method can guarantee truth; the question is which approach produces more reliable outcomes.

What defines an accusatorial approach?

An accusatorial interrogation typically begins after the investigator has already decided the suspect is guilty. The goal is to overcome the suspect's resistance and obtain a confession. Kassin and Gudjonsson (2004) describe the process as one that isolates the suspect, presents the case as strong, dismisses denials and offers moral justifications or face-saving excuses designed to make confessing feel like the easiest option.

The Reid Technique, developed in the United States in the 1960s, is the best-known accusatorial model. It uses a structured nine-step process that includes direct confrontation, theme development (offering the suspect reasons to confess), handling denials and presenting an alternative question that assumes guilt in either answer. For a detailed look at Reid's structure and its criticisms, see the Reid Technique explained.

Key features of the accusatorial approach include:

Presumption of guilt before questioning begins.
Confrontation with evidence, sometimes including claims about evidence that does not exist.
Minimisation and maximisation. Minimisation downplays the seriousness of the offence to encourage confession. Maximisation overstates the evidence or potential consequences.
Closed questioning designed to limit the suspect's narrative.
Behavioural analysis during a pre-interrogation interview, used to assess whether the suspect appears deceptive, though research shows that professional lie detection operates at about 54% accuracy (Bond and DePaulo, 2006).

What defines an information-gathering approach?

An information-gathering interview starts from the position that the interviewer does not know what happened. The aim is to obtain a full, accurate and testable account. Vrij, Meissner, Fisher, Kassin, Morgan and Kleinman (2017) describe this as a search for information rather than a battle for a confession.

Key features include:

No presumption of guilt. The interviewer enters with an open mind.
Rapport building. Creating a cooperative atmosphere so the interviewee provides more and better information.
Open-ended questions. Prompts such as "Tell me what happened" produce longer, more detailed narratives than closed or leading questions.
Strategic evidence disclosure. Rather than presenting all evidence at once, the interviewer may introduce evidence gradually to test the account's consistency. This is the opposite of the accusatorial approach, which often front-loads evidence to overwhelm the suspect.
Ethical boundaries. No threats, no false evidence, no implied promises of leniency.

What does the research show?

Meissner, Redlich, Michael, Evans, Camilletti, Bhatt and Brandon (2014) conducted a meta-analytic review comparing the two approaches across experimental and field studies. Their findings were clear: information-gathering methods significantly increased true confessions and significantly decreased false confessions relative to accusatorial methods.

Walsh and Bull (2010) examined real police interviews in England and Wales and found that interviews rated as higher in skill, using rapport, structured questioning and a non-confrontational style, were more likely to result in confessions or significant admissions. Aggressive or confrontational interviews were less effective.

Kassin and Gudjonsson (2004) reviewed the broader confession literature and identified several mechanisms through which accusatorial methods can produce false confessions, including psychological pressure on vulnerable individuals, the use of false evidence ploys and the effects of prolonged interrogation.

Feature	Accusatorial	Information-gathering
Starting assumption	Suspect is guilty	Unknown; open to multiple explanations
Primary goal	Obtain a confession	Obtain an accurate account
Questioning style	Closed, leading, confrontational	Open-ended, narrative-based
Evidence use	Presented early to overwhelm	Disclosed strategically to test the account
Deception by interviewer	Sometimes permitted	Generally excluded
Rapport	Secondary or tactical	Central to the method
False confession risk	Higher	Lower

Why have some countries moved away from accusatorial methods?

England and Wales replaced their accusatorial approach with the PEACE model in 1992, partly in response to several high-profile miscarriages of justice linked to coerced confessions. Norway, New Zealand and Australia have adopted similar frameworks. Snook, Eastwood, Stinson, Tedeschini and House (2010) called for Canada to adopt a PEACE-based model, noting that Canadian police training still relied heavily on the Reid Technique despite the growing evidence base for information-gathering methods.

In 2021, the Mendez Principles were published as an international standard, offering six principles grounded in science, law and ethics to promote non-coercive interviewing worldwide.

The United States has been slower to shift. The Reid Technique remains dominant in American police training, though some agencies and federal bodies have begun exploring information-gathering alternatives.

How does Murder Book let players explore both approaches?

Murder Book: The Art of Interrogation is an upcoming narrative interrogation game from Gungrounds, an independent studio in Zagreb, Croatia. Development screenshots show a technique menu that includes both cooperative and confrontational options. Build Trust is described as "fostering an environment where the suspect feels comfortable and secure enough to communicate openly," which mirrors the rapport principle of information-gathering interviewing. Techniques such as Confrontation and Bluffing suggest that players also have access to more accusatorial tactics.

The game's design implies that players must weigh how they question suspects. Development materials show a branching case map with achievement endings, suggesting that different questioning approaches may lead to different outcomes, much as the research suggests that different methods produce different kinds of confessions and information.

Murder Book is in development for PC (Steam) and mobile, with release currently planned for the end of Q2 2027.