This study compared two versions of the NICHD Protocol for interviewing young suspected sexual offenders: the Revised Suspect Protocol (RSP) and the Standard Suspect Protocol (SSP). The RSP incorporated relevant evidence-based practices informed by research on the value of (a) effectively explaining the suspects’ rights, (b) rapport building and support, and (c) appropriate questioning strategies. Interviewers using the RSP communicated the children’s rights more effectively (reading them more often, checking, verifying, and correcting understanding) and provided more support. In the substantive phase, they remained supportive while recall prompts dominated the questioning. Compared to children in the SSP group, children in the RSP condition understood their rights better, were more responsive during rapport-building, and reacted to interviewer support in the substantive phase with increased responsiveness, which in turn, predicted reduced reluctance, increased emotional expression, and greater informativeness. They were also more likely to make full rather than partial confessions than children in the SSP group. Full confessions were positively predicted by the appropriate communication of legal rights, interviewer support, and reliance on open-ended prompts, thereby confirming the superiority of the RSP relative to the SSP.

Supportive forensic interviews conducted in accordance with the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Revised Protocol (RP) help many alleged victims describe abusive experiences. When children remain reluctant to make allegations, the RP guides interviewers to (a) focus on rapport building and nonsuggestive support in a first interview, and (b) plan a second interview to allow continued rapport building before exploring for possible abuse. We explored the dynamics of such two-session RP interviews. Of 204 children who remained reluctant in an initial interview, we focused on 104 who made allegations when re-interviewed a few days later. A structural equation model revealed that interviewer support during the first session predicted children's cooperation during the rapport-building phase of the second session, which, in turn, predicted more spontaneous allegations, which were associated with the interviewers’ enhanced use of open-ended questions. Together, these factors mediated the effects of support on children's free recall of forensically important information. This highlighted the importance of emphasizing rapport with reluctant children, confirming that some children may need more time to build rapport even with supportive interviewers.

Australian undergraduate programmes implementing Indigenous studies courses suggest transformative educational outcomes for students; however, the mechanism behind this is largely unknown. To begin to address this, we obtained baseline data upon entry to tertiary education (Time 1) and follow-up data upon completion of an Indigenous studies health unit (Time 2) on student learning approaches, student-teacher rapport, classroom community, critical reflection (CR) and transformative experiences within the unit. Three-hundred-thirty-six health science first-year students (273 females, 63 males) completed anonymous in-class paper questionnaires at both time points. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicated that (a) CR was the strongest predictor of transformative learning experiences, (b) the relationship between deep learning approach upon entry to tertiary education and transformative learning experiences was mediated by CR and (c) rapport and classroom community accounted for significant variance in CR. These results suggest that students benefit from tutors’ ability to develop rapport and classroom community, leading to greater capacity for student CR. This in turn promotes transformative learning possibilities within the Indigenous studies learning environment. These findings provide a further rationale for institutions to embed Indigenous knowledge into courses and highlight the importance of evaluating their effect and quality.

This study examines the co-construction of five successful gatekeeping encounters. Drawing from a database of employment interviews, the emically derived concept of trustworthiness is identified as a key determiner in the success or failure of job candidates. Three critical, potentially problematic moves are identified: supplying inappropriate references, demanding too high a salary, and failing to account for gaps in one's work history. What distinguishes the successful from the failed interviews is not the frequency of these potentially damaging occurrences but the compensatory characteristics of those encounters in which trust (and subsequent success) is established. The successful candidates vary widely in terms of second language ability (in the case of nonnative speakers of English) and work experience. What they share, however, is the ability to present themselves positively, to establish rapport/solidarity with their interlocutor, and to demonstrate flexibility regarding job requirements and preferences. Both linguistic and nonlinguistic features are examined.I am grateful to Gabriele Kasper and Claire Kramsch, who provided me with numerous critical and insightful comments on earlier versions of this article. The data analyzed here come from the database that was used for my dissertation research (2001). Attempts have been made to reflect the constructive, and much appreciated, criticisms of two insightful anonymous reviewers of an earlier version of this article.

This paper briefly describes four essential elements of interviews involving children, where the primary goal is to obtain detailed and accurate information about an event (e.g., an alleged incident of sexual abuse). These elements include (a) the establishment of a good rapport with the child, (b) a clear description of the purpose and ground-rules of the interview, (c) objectivity and open-mindness, and (d) effective questioning skills. A rationale for the importance of each of these elements and practical recommendations are offered.

The article describes the dilemmas raised in conducting a feminist research project with ‘anti-feminist’ women. Drawing on a qualitative study of the perspectives of women in the British moral lobby, the author raises questions about the applicability of the existing feminist methodological literature to research with relatively powerful and potentially hostile women. In particular, a discussion of interview rapport in terms of ‘moments’ of understanding and disjuncture, based on a recognition of the fractured and often contradictory subjectivities of researcher and researched, is presented as a contribution to debates about feminist standpoint research. Concerns about the desirability of research participants as active subjects at all stages of the research process and reflections on the fluctuating nature of power are also presented.