What Is Maximization in an Interrogation?

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

Maximization is an interrogation technique in which the interviewer exaggerates the seriousness of the offence, overstates the strength of the evidence and emphasises the severity of potential consequences. It is the "hard sell" counterpart to minimization, which takes a softer approach. Where minimization offers sympathy and excuses, maximization uses intimidation: the interviewer might claim that the evidence is overwhelming, that accomplices have already confessed, or that the suspect faces the harshest possible charges. Psychologists Saul Kassin and Karlyn McNall identified minimization and maximization in 1991 as the two broad categories into which most interrogation tactics fall. Research has found that maximization can pressure both guilty and innocent suspects, and that it raises concerns about the reliability of any confession it produces.

Key takeaways

Maximization overstates the seriousness of the offence and the strength of the evidence to pressure a suspect into confessing.
Kassin and McNall (1991) described maximization as communicating an implied threat of harsh punishment.
Research suggests maximization can increase psychological pressure on innocent suspects and contribute to false confessions.
Maximization is often used alongside minimization in a "one-two" sequence during interrogation.
Non-coercive, information-gathering approaches such as the PEACE model avoid maximization entirely.

How does maximization differ from minimization?

Maximization and minimization represent opposite ends of the same strategy. Both aim to change a suspect's calculation about whether to confess, but they do so in different ways.

Kassin and Gudjonsson's 2004 review in Psychological Science in the Public Interest described maximization as a technique that intimidates suspects by overstating the seriousness of the offence and the magnitude of the charges. The interviewer might claim to have fingerprint evidence, witnesses or forensic results that do not exist, or suggest that the suspect will face the maximum sentence unless they cooperate.

Minimization, by contrast, downplays the offence and offers face-saving excuses. In practice, interrogators sometimes alternate between the two: beginning with maximization to create fear, then switching to minimization to offer a way out. This pattern is a core feature of the Reid Technique, one of the most widely used interrogation training programmes in North America.

For a detailed look at minimization, see the companion article on that tactic.

What does research say about maximization and confessions?

Kassin and McNall's 1991 study in Law and Human Behavior asked participants to read interrogation transcripts and judge the likely outcomes. Those who read maximization scenarios inferred that the suspect faced harsher punishment. In other words, maximization communicates an implied threat, just as minimization communicates an implied promise.

The 2005 study by Russano, Meissner, Narchet and Kassin, published in Psychological Science, used an experimental paradigm in which some participants were guilty of breaking a rule and others were innocent. The researchers tested the effects of minimization and explicit deals on confession rates. While the study focused primarily on minimization, Kassin and Gudjonsson's broader review noted that maximization contributes to the coercive atmosphere in which false confessions occur. When a suspect believes the evidence is overwhelming and the consequences severe, maintaining innocence can feel futile, particularly during long interrogations.

The false-evidence ploy is a specific form of maximization in which the interviewer claims to possess incriminating evidence that does not exist. Research has found this tactic to be particularly risky for increasing false confessions.

Why might an innocent person confess under maximization?

Several psychological mechanisms help explain why maximization can lead innocent people to confess.

Perceived futility. When an interviewer insists that the evidence is conclusive and that denial is pointless, an innocent suspect may conclude that no one will believe them regardless. Research on why innocent people confess describes how this sense of futility is a common factor in documented false confession cases.

Decision-making under pressure. Long interrogations combined with maximization can impair judgement. Suspects may focus on ending the immediate discomfort of the interrogation rather than considering the long-term consequences of a false admission.

Vulnerability. Young suspects, people with intellectual disabilities and those experiencing sleep deprivation or high stress are particularly susceptible to the pressure of maximization tactics.

Kassin and colleagues noted in a 2010 white paper in Law and Human Behavior that interrogation tactics should be evaluated not only by whether they produce confessions, but by whether they produce reliable confessions. Maximization, by pressuring suspects without regard to guilt or innocence, undermines that reliability.

Who is most affected by maximization?

Research has identified several groups that are particularly vulnerable to maximization pressure. Young suspects may be more susceptible because they tend to focus on the immediate situation and struggle to weigh long-term consequences against short-term relief. People with intellectual disabilities may find it harder to challenge an interviewer's claims about evidence or charges.

Kassin and colleagues' 2010 white paper in Law and Human Behavior identified youth, intellectual disability, mental illness and certain personality traits such as high compliance and suggestibility as risk factors for false confessions. Maximization can interact with all of these: the more overwhelming the claimed evidence and the more severe the stated consequences, the harder it is for vulnerable individuals to maintain their position.

Lengthy interrogations compound the problem. When maximization continues for hours, even psychologically robust suspects may begin to calculate that confessing is the only way to end the ordeal. For more on how interrogation length affects outcomes, see Does Interrogation Length Affect False Confession Risk?

Is maximization legal?

In many jurisdictions, maximization is permitted. Courts in the United States have generally allowed interrogators to exaggerate evidence or overstate charges, provided they do not make explicit threats. However, the line between an implied threat and an explicit one can be difficult to draw, and some courts have suppressed confessions obtained through particularly aggressive maximization, especially when combined with other coercive factors.

The legal status does not settle the scientific question. Techniques that are lawful may still produce unreliable results, and researchers have consistently recommended caution.

What are the alternatives?

The PEACE model, used in England and Wales and increasingly adopted elsewhere, avoids both maximization and minimization. It treats the interview as an opportunity to gather information rather than to secure a confession. The Mendez Principles on Effective Interviewing similarly recommend against any technique that manipulates a suspect's perception of evidence strength or likely punishment.

How does Murder Book approach interrogation pressure?

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 Confrontation alongside options like Build Trust and Baiting. The game does not reduce interrogation to simply pressing harder. Players examine unreliable stories, behavioural changes and narrative gaps, weighing what they observe against what the suspect says.

The approach reflects the research finding that behaviour alone is not proof of guilt. Cases are designed for focused 5–10-minute sessions. Murder Book is in development for PC (Steam) and mobile, with release currently planned for the end of Q2 2027.