Polismyndighetens bibliotek och kunskapstjänst

*000      ab a        ir    
*00134315
*008      s2022||||sw ||||e||||||||||||eng||            
*084  $2kssb/8
*1001 $aErnberg, Emelie
*24510$aInterviewing witnesses in a second language : a comparison of interpreter-assisted, unaided, and self-administered interviews$h[Artikel]
*260  $c2023
*500  $aKontakta biblioteket om du vill läsa denna publikation.
*520  $aPurpose: With increasing rates of migration worldwide, police are more likely than ever to interview witnesses who do not have the same first language as they do. We examined how to best approach this situation by comparing three different ways of conducting such interviews.
Results: For total number of details reported, the no interpreter condition resulted in moderately fewer details being reported than the interpreter and SAI conditions. A similar trend was seen for correct details; however, these differences were not statistically significant. Participants in the SAI condition were somewhat less accurate in their reports compared with both the interpreter and no interpreter conditions.
Conslusions: f interviewing without an interpreter, there is minimal loss of reported detail when the witness speaks the interviewer's language at an intermediate level and the questions posed are few and simple. Moreover, provided that the witness has a sufficient level of literacy, administrating the SAI in the witness's native language can be an alternative for witnesses with no or limited verbal ability in the interviewer's language.
*650 7$aFörhör$2sao
*650 7$aTolkar$2sao
*650 7$aIntervjuteknik$2sao$0https://id.kb.se/term/sao/Intervjuteknik
*650 7$aPolisarbete$2sao
*651  $aSverige
*653  $aPolisforskning i Sverige
*7001 $aMac Giolla, Erik
*7730 $tLegal and Criminological Psychology.$x1355-3259 ;$g2023(28):1, s. 60– 73
*856  $uhttps://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12231$yFulltext
^