Forensic discourse analysis (FDA) is a methodology used to examine the linguistic and communicative elements of investigative interviews in order to gain insight into the accuracy and validity of witness or suspect statements.
By analyzing the language used in these interviews, FDA can help investigators identify inconsistencies or contradictions in the narrative, assess the credibility of the speaker, and ultimately determine the reliability of the information provided.
During the analysis, investigators pay close attention to linguistic cues such as lexical choices, syntactic patterns, speech hesitations, turn-taking, and discourse coherence. These cues can reveal potential discrepancies, evasion tactics, or attempts to manipulate information.
For example, an interviewee may exhibit changes in language style or use excessive jargon to obscure the truth. They may also display non-verbal cues, such as hesitation, excessive self-correction, or lack of eye contact, which can raise suspicions about their credibility.
Forensic discourse analysis is based on the understanding that language is a powerful tool for conveying meaning and constructing a sense of reality. In investigative interviews, language can be used to convey factual information, convey emotions, and create a sense of trust or rapport.
The book MASTERING THE ART OF INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEWING: Enhancing Your Skills in Extracting Information speaks about this tool. This book is written by CA Mayur Joshi and Charanjeet Singh Bhatia. This book is one of the reference books for the syllabus of the Certified Forensic Accounting Professional course. CFAP is an important landmark in the journey of a forensic career
However, language can also be used to mislead or deceive, either intentionally or unintentionally. For this reason, forensic discourse analysis seeks to uncover the hidden meanings and intentions behind the language used in interviews.
One of the key aspects of FDA is the identification of linguistic markers of deception. These markers can include linguistic features such as hesitations, false starts, and changes in pitch or tone. Additionally, forensic discourse analysis may examine the use of pronouns, verb tenses, and other linguistic elements to assess the credibility of a statement. For example, a witness who uses present tense verbs to describe an event that occurred in the past may be seen as less credible than a witness who uses past tense verbs.
Another aspect of forensic discourse analysis is the identification of patterns in the language used by witnesses or suspects. By examining the language used in multiple interviews or statements, forensic discourse analysis can help identify inconsistencies or contradictions in the narrative. This can be particularly important in cases where multiple witnesses provide conflicting accounts of an event or where a suspect provides multiple versions of their story.
Forensic discourse analysis can also be used to analyze the dynamics of the interview itself. For example, the use of leading questions or the withholding of information by the interviewer may influence the language used by the interviewee. Additionally, forensic discourse analysis may examine the power dynamics at play in the interview, such as the degree of control exerted by the interviewer over the interviewee.
One of the key benefits of this technique is its ability to provide insight into the accuracy and validity of witness or suspect statements. By identifying linguistic markers of deception and patterns in the language used, forensic discourse analysis can help investigators assess the credibility of the information provided. This can be particularly useful in cases where physical evidence is limited or inconclusive.
Forensic discourse analysis can also provide important information about the motivations and intentions of the speaker. For example, forensic discourse analysis may reveal that a witness is intentionally misleading investigators in order to protect themselves or others. Alternatively, FDA may uncover the fact that a suspect is attempting to shift blame onto another individual.
In order to effectively use discourse analysis in investigative interviews, investigators must be trained in linguistic analysis and the identification of linguistic markers of deception. Additionally, FDA must be used in conjunction with other investigative techniques, such as physical evidence analysis and witness corroboration.
FDA is a powerful tool for enhancing the accuracy and reliability of investigative interviews. By examining the language used in interviews, forensic discourse analysis can help identify inconsistencies, assess credibility, and ultimately provide valuable information for investigators. As advancements in linguistics continue to evolve, FDA is likely to become an increasingly important tool for investigative interviewing.
