KUBARK COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION

KUBARK COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pa ge s
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Explanation of Pur pose
B. Explanation of Organization
111. LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
IV. THE INTERROGATOR .
V. THE INTERROGATEE . 15-29
A. Types of Sources: Intelligence Cat egori es 15-19
B. Types of Sources: Per sonal i t y Cat egori es 19-28
C. Ot her Clues 28-29
VI. SCREENING AND OTHER PRELIMINARIES 30-37
A. Screeni ng 30-33
B. Ot her Pr el i mi nar y Pr ocedur es 33-37
C. Summar y : 37
VII. PLANNING THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATION 38-51
j A. The Nat ure of Counterintelligence
u
Int errogat i on
B. The Int errogat i on Pl an
C. , The SpecFfics
VLII. THE NON- COER GIVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATION 52-81
Pages
General Remarks
The St ruct ure of the Interrogation
1,. The Opening
2. The Reconnaissance
3. The Detailed Questioning
4, The Conclusion
Techniques of Non- Coercive Interrogation
of Resistant Sources
M. . THE COER GIVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATION OF RESISTANT SOURCES, 82-104
82
A. Rest ri ct i ons
B. The The0i.y of Coercion 82-85
C. Arrest 85-86
D. Detention 86-87
E. Deprivation of Sensory Stimuli
87-90 ..,. ---. ..
F. Thr eat s and Fe a r 90-92
G. Debility 92-93
93-95
H, Pai n
I. Heightened Suggestibility and Hypnosis ' 95-98
J. Nar cosi s 98-100
K. The Detection of Malingering 101-102
L, Conclusion 103-104
X. INTERROGATOR'S CHECK LIST
XI. DESCRIPTIVE BILIOGRAPHY
XII. INDEX
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Explanation of Purpose
This manual cannot teach anyone how t o be, or become,
a good interrogator. At best it can help r eader s to avoid t he
characteris'tic mistakes of poor interrogators.
I t s purpose is t o provide guidelines for KUBARK
interrogation, and particularly the counterintelligence
interrogation of resistant sources. Designed a s an aid for
interrogators and others i nmedi at el y concerned, it is based
largely upon t he published resul t s of extensive research,
including scientific inquiries conducted by specialists in
closely related subjects.
There is nothing mysterious about interrogation. It
consists of no mor e than obtaining needed information through
responses to questions. As is t rue of all craftsmen, some
interrogators ar e more able than others; and some of their
superiority may be innate. But sound interrogation nevertheless
r est s upon a knowledge of the subject mat t er and on cert ai n
broad principles, chiefly psychological, which a r e not hard
to understand. The success of good interrogators depends in
large measure upon their use, conscious or not, of these
principles and of processes and techniques deriving from them.
Knowledge of subject mat t er and of the basic principles wi l l
not of itself creat e a successful interrogation, but it will make
possible the avoidance of mistakes that a r e charact eri st i c of
poor interrogation. The purpose, then, is not t o teach the
reader how t o be a good interrogator but rat her to t el l him
what he must l earn in order to become a good interrogator.
-
he ' interrogation of a resistant source who i s a staff or
agent member of an Orbit intelligence or security service or of
a clandestine Communist organization i s one of the most exacting
of professional tasks. Uaually the odds still favor the interrogator,
but they a r e sharpl y cut by the t r ai nhg, experience, pztiience
and toughness of t he interrogatee. In such c i r c u. s t a nc e s the
i nt errogat or needs all the help that he can get. And a.principa1
source of ai d today is scientific findkgs. The intelligence
ser vi ce which is able t o bring pertinent, modern knowledge to
bear upon i t s probl ems enjoys huge advantages over a servi ce
which conducts its clandestine business in eighteenth century
fashion. It is t r ue t hat American psychologists have devoted
some what mor e attention t o Communist interrogation technique a,
part i cul arl y "brainwashing", than t o U. S. ' practices. Yet they
have conducted scientific inquiries into many subjects that a r e
cl osel y rel at ed t o interrogation: the effects of debility and
isolation, t he polygraph, reactions t o pain and fear, hypnosis
and heightened suggestibility, narcosis, etc. This work is of
sufficient importance and relevance that it i s no longer possible
t o di scuss interrogation significantly without reference t o the
psychological r es ear ch conducted in the past decade. Fo r t hi s
r eason a maj or purpose of t hi s study i s to focus relevant
scientific findings upon CI interrogation. Every effort has been
made t o report and i nt erpret these findings in our own language,
in pl ace of the terminology employed by the psychologists.
Thi s study is by no means confined to a resume and
i nt erpret at i on of psychological findings. The approach of the
psychologists i s customarily manipulative; that is, they
suggest methods of imposing controls or alterations upon
the i nt errogat ee f r om the outside. Except within the
Communist f r ame of reference, they have paid l es s attention
t o t he creat i on of i nt ernal controls--i. .e., conversion of the
source, s o that voluntary cooperation results. Moral
considerations asi de, the imposition of external techniques
of manipulating people car r i es with it the grave risk' of l at er
lawsuits, adverse publicity, or other attempts to' strike back.
-
B. Explanation of Organization
This study moves from the general topic of interrogation
:,
per se ( Par t s I. II, IZI, IV, V, and VI) t o plannijng the.counter-
'.
intelligence interrogation (Part VII) to the CI interrogation of
resistant sources ( Par t s Vm, IX, and X). The definitions,
1ega.l considerations, and.discussions of interrogators and
sources, as well a s Section VI on screening and other
preliminaries, a r e relevant to all kinds of interrogations.
Once it is established that the source i s probably a counter-
intelligence target (in other words, i s probably a member of
a foreign intelligence or security service, a Communist, or
a part of any other group engaged in clandestine activity
directed against the national security), the interrogation is
planned and conducted accordingly. The CI interrogation
techniques ar e discussed in an order of increasing intensity
as the focus on source resi st ant e grows sharper. he last
section, on do's and dont's, i s a return t o the broader view
of the opening part s; as a check-list, it is placed last solely
for convenience.
IL DEFINITIONS
Most of the intelligence terminology employed here which
may once have been ambiguous has been clarified through usage
or through KUBARK instructions. For t hi s reason definitions
have been omitted for such t er ms a s burn notice, defector,
escapee, and refugee. Other definitions have been included
despite a csmmon agreement about meaning if the significance
is shaded by the context.
1. Assessment: the analysis and synthesis of information,
usually about a person or persons, for the purpose of appraisal.
The assessment of individuals i s based upon the compilation and
use of psychological as well as biographic detail.
2. Bona fides: evidence or reliable information about
identity, personal (including intelligence) history, and
,
intentions or goo d faith.
3. Control: the capacity t o generate, al t er, or halt
human behavior by implying, citing, or using physical or
psychological means to ensure compliance with direction.
The compliance may be voluntary or involuntary. Control of
an interrogatee can rarel y be established without control of
his envir onrnent .
4, Counterintelligence interrogation: an interrogation
(see #7) designed t o obtain information about hostile
clandestine activities and persons or groups engaged therein.
KUBARK CI interrogations ar e designed, almost invariably,
to yield information about foreign intelligence and security
services or Communist organizations. Because security is an
element of counterintelligence, interrogations conducted to
obtain admis sions of clande stine plans or activities directed
against KUBARK or PBPRIMX security ar e also CI
interrogations. But unlike a police interrogation, the CI
interrogation i s not aimed at causing the 'interrogatee to
incriminate himself a s a means of bringing him to trial.
Admissions of complicity ar e not, to a CI service, ends
!
i n themselves but merel y prelu&es ts t he zc-l;a;tion Y-- "A of
mor e information.
5. Debriefing: obtaining information by questioning
a controlled and witting source who is normally a willing
one.
6. El i ci t i ng obtaining information, without revealing
intent or exceptional interest, through a verbal .or written
exchange with a person who may be willing or unwilling t o
provide what is sought and who may or may not be controlled.
7, Interrogation: obtaining information by direct
questioning of a per son or per sons under conditions which
ar e either part l y or fully controlled by the questioner or ar e
believed by those questioned t o be subject t o his control.
Because interviewing, debriefing, and eliciting ar e simpler
methods of obtaining in. ormation from cooperative subjects,
interrogation i s usually reserved for sources who ar e suspect,
resi st ant , or both.
8. Intelligence interview: obtaining information, not
customarily under 'controlled conditions, by questioning a
. -
person who is aware of the nature and perhaps of the significance
of his answers but who i s ordinarily unaware of the purposes
and specific intelligence affiliations of the interviewer.
111. LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
The legislation which founded KUBARK specifically denied
it any law-enforcement or police powers. : ye t detention in a
controlled environment and perhaps for a lengthy period is
frequently essent i al to a successful counterintelligence interro-
gation of a recal ci t rant s our c e . ' . r
j This necess ity, obviously. should
-
be determined as earl y as poss~bl e.
f
the
The legality of detaining and questioning a person, and of
methods employed,
Detention poses the most common of the legal problems. KUBARK
has no independent legal authority to detaln anyone against hi s wil1.r
__I The has tc
in which soma KUBARK interrogations have been conducted has not
always been the product of impatience. Some security servi ces, especially
-those of the Sino-Soviet Bloc, may work a t leisure, depending upon time
as well a s their own methods to mel t recalcitrance. KUBARK usually
-
cannot. Accordingly, unless it is considered that the prospective
i nt errogat ee is cooperative and will remain s o indefinitely, the f i r s t
st ep in planning an interrogation is to detcrminc how long the source.
can be held. The choice of methods depends in par t upon the answer ... ..,
to this question.
I
The handling and questioning of defectora a r e subject to the
provis ions of Directlvc No. 4: to i t s rel at ed Chief/KUBARK
Directtves, pri nci pal l y~ - Book Dispatch
L -I
and to pertinent . Those cd'ncerned with the
interrogation of defectors, escapees, refugees, or repat ri at es should
know t hese references.
The kinds of countcrhtclligcncc information to be sought Ln a
CI interrogation are stated generally in Chief/KUBARK ~i r e c t l v ;
J
and in gr eat er dot au Ln Book ~ i s p a t c h c
2
The interrogation of PBPRIME cltizcna poeaa speci al problems.
Fi r s t , such interrogations should not bc conhuctcd for reasons lying
outside the spher e of KUBARK1a responsibilities. . Fo r example, the
' . &3-. :
but should not normally-. ...
-
become di rect l y rzlvclrred. Clandestine activity conducted abroad on
3 : .,.
behalf of a forei gn power by a private PBPRIME citizen does fal l within
KUBARKTs investigative and interrogative respanslbilities. However,
any investigation; interrogation, or interview of a PBPRIME citizen
which is conducted abroad because it is known or suspected that he i s
engaged in clandestine activities directed against PBPRIME securi t y
i nt erest s requi re8 the pr i or and personal approval of ~ h i e f f ~ ~ ~ ~ d or
of hi s deputy.
Since 4 Octo%er 1961, ext rat erri t ori al application has been given t o
the Espionage Act, making it henceforth possible to prosecute Ln the
Feder al Court s any PBPRIME citizen who violates the statutes of this
Act in forei gn countries. ODENVY bas requested that it be informed, in
advance if t i me permi t s, if any investigative st eps a r e undertaken in
t hese cases. Since KUBARK employees cannot be witnesses in court,
each investigation mus t be conducted In such a manner that evidence
C_
obtained may be properl v introduced If the case comes to trial.
-
st at es
policy and procedures f or the conduct of investigations of PBPRIME
citizens abroad.
Interrogations conducted under compulsion or duress a r e especially
lfkely to involve illegality and to entail damaging consequences f or KUBARK.
Therefore pr i or Headquart ers approval a t the KUDOVE level mus t be
obtained f or the ' hterrogation of any source agai nst his will and under any
of the following circumstances:
1.. If bodily harm i s to be inflicted.
2. If medical, chemical, or el ect ri cal methods or
mat er i al s a r e to b'e used to induce acquiescence.
The CI interrogator dealing with an uncooperative interrogatee
who has been well-briefed by a hostile service on the legal restrictions
under which ODYOKE servi ces operate must expect some effective ' \,.,
delaying tactics. The interrogatee has been told that KUBARK will
not hold hi m long, that he need only r esi st for a while. Nikolay
KHOKHLOV, f or example, reported that before he left for Frankfurt
am Main on his assassination mission, the following thoughts coursed
through his head: "If I should get into the hands of Western authorities,
I can become reticent, silent, and deny my volunhry v.isit to
Okolovtch. I know I will not be tortured and that under the procedures
of west er n law I can conduct mys& boldly. (17) /-?he footnote numerals
in this text a r e keyed to the numbered bibliographYat the end.7 The
i nt errogat or who encounters expert r es istance should hot flurried
apd pr ess; if he does, he is likelier to commit Ulegal act s which the
source can l at er use against hlm. Remembering that t h e Is on his
side, the interrogator should arrange to get as much of it a s he needs.
IV. THE INTERROGATOR
A number of studies of 'interrogation di scuss qualities sai d to
be desirable In an interrogator. The l i s t seems al most endless -
a professional manner, forcefulness, undcrs tanding and sympathy,
breadth of gene-ral knowledge, ar ca knowledge, I ' a practical
howl edge of psychology", skill in the tricks of the trade, al er t -
ness, perseverance, integrity, discretion, patience, a high I. Q.,
extensive experience, flexibility, etc. , etc. Some texts even
discuss the Lnterrogator' s manners and grooming, and one pre-
scri bed the t rai t s considered dcs irablc in his secret ary.
A repetition of this catalogue would s er ve no purpose her e,
especially because al most all of the charact eri st i cs mentioned
a r e al so desi rabl e in case officers, agents, policemen, salesmen.
lmkbcrjacks, and everybody el se. The s ear ch of the pertinent
scientific l i t er at ur e disclosed no report s of studies based on common-
denominator t r ai t s of successful intcrrogators or any other controlled
inquiries that would invest these l i st s with any objective' ~ l i d i t y .
Perhaps the four qualifications of chief importance to the
interrogator - ar c ( 1) enough operational tralning and experience
to permit cp'ick recognition of leads; (2) r eal familiarity with the
language to be used; (3) extensive background laowledge about the
interrogatcc' s native country (and intelligence servi ce, if employed
by one); and (4) a genuine understanding of the source a s a person.
Statioqs, and even a few bases can
call upon one or several interrogators to supply these prerequisites,
individually or as a team. Whenever a number of i nt errogat ors is
available, the percentage of successes is i ncreased by careful
-
matchlng of questioners and sources and by ensuring that rigid prc-
scheduling does not prevent such matching. Of the four t r ai t s listed,
a g e mh e insight into the source' s charact er and motives is perhaps
most important but l east common. Later' portions of this manual
explore this topic in more detail. One genc,ral observation is intro-
duced now, however, because it is considered basic to the establish-'.
mcnt of rapport, upon which the success of non-cocrcivc interrogatloc "=
depends.
The interrogator should remember that he and 'the interrogatec
a r e often working a t cross-purposes not because the intcrrogatcc is
malevolently wfthho1d~h.g or misleading but simply because what he
wants f r om the situation is not what the lntcrrogator wants. The
interrogator' s goal is to obtain useful information--facts about which
the interrogatec presumably has acquired information. But at the
outset of the interrogation, and perhaps for a long t h e , afterwards,
the person being questioned is not greatly concerned with communi-
catlng his body of specialized information to his questioner; hc is
concerned with putting his best foot forward. The question upper-
most in hi s mind, at the beginning, is not likely to be ''How can I
help PBPRIMEP1l but rather "What sort of impress ion am I making? "
and, al most immediately thereafter, "What is going to happen to me
now?'' (An exception is the penetration agent or provocateur sent
to a KUBARK field installation after training in withstanding interroga-
tion. Such an agent may feel confident enough not to be gravely
concerned about h b e l f . His primary interest, f r om the beginning,
may be the acquisition of information about the interrogator and his
service. )
The skilled interrogator can save a great deal of time by under-
standing &e emotional needs of the intcrrogatce. Most people con-
fronted by a n official--and dimly powerful--representative of a foreign
power will get down to cases much faster if made to feel, f r om the
start, that they a r e being treated as individuals. So s implc a mat t er
as greeting an interrogatec by his name a t the opening of the sesaion
establishes in hi s mind the comforting awareness that he is considered
as a person, not a squeezable sponge. This is not to say that egotirrtic
types should be allowed to bask a t length in the warmth of individual
recognition. But it is Important to assuage the fear of denigration
,
which afflicts many people when fi rst interrogated by making it clear
J
-
that the individuality of thc intcrrogatcc is recognized. With this
common understanding established, the interrogation can move on to
-mpersonal mat t ers and will not later be thwarted or interrupted--
or a t l east not as often--by irrelevant answers designed not to
provide fact s but to prove that the interrogatee is a respectable
member of the human race.
. .
: .
...
... . .
Although it is often necessary to trick people into telling
. . -.. .
. .
what we need to bow, specially in CI interrogations, the
.. .
initial question which the interrogator asks of himself shbuld
. ..
be, I1How can I make him want to tell me what he knows?" rat her
. .
than "Hour can I t rap him into disclos ing what.he koows? If the
per son being ques t i med is genuinely hostile for ideological
reasons, techniques of manipulation a r e In order. BU; the
assumption of hostility--or a t l east the use of pressure .tactics
a t the f i r s t encounter--may make difficult subjects even out of
those who wcnild respond to recognition of individuality and an
Lnit'ial assumption of good will.
Another preliminary comment about the interrogator is that
normally he should not personalize. That is, he should not be
pleased, flattered, frustrated, goaded, or otherwise emotionally
and personally affected by the interrogation. A calculated display
of feeling employed f or a specific purpose is an exception; but
even under these circumstances the interrogator is in full control.
The interrogation situation is intensely inter-personal; i t is
therefore all the mor e necessary to strike a counter-balance by
an attitude which the subject clearly recognizes as essentially fai r
and objective. The kind of person who cannot help personalizing,
who becomes .emotionally involved ' m the interrogation situation,
may habe chance (and even spectacular) successes as an interrogator
but is al most c e r t a h to have a poor batting average.
It i s frequently said that the interrogator should be "a good
judge of human nature. l 1 In fact, '
3
t- (3) This study states l at er (page
"Great attention has been given to the degree to which persons a r e
able to lnake judgements f r om casual observations regarding the
personality charact eri st i cs of another. The consensus of research
is that with respect to many kinds of judgments, a t l east some judges
perform reliably better than chance. . . .
Nevertheless, l l . . . the level
of reliability in judgments is so low that research encounters
difficulties when i t seeks to determine who makes better judgments. . . . I I
(3) Tn brief, the interrogator is likelier to overestimate hi s ability' ..
h
to judge ot her= +kc ts -d-,rest:kzf,e it, especially tl he hzs bad
l i t t l e o r no training in modern psychology. It follows that e r r or s
in as s es s ment and In handling a r e likelier to resul t f r om snap
judgments based upon the assuinptiqn of b t e skill in judg'mg
ot hers than f r om holding such judgments in abeyance until enough
facts a r e hown.
Ther e has been a good deal of discussion'of interrogation
expert s vs. subject-matter experts. Such facts a s a r e available
suggest that the l at t er have a slight advantage. But for counter-
intelligence purposes the debate is academic.
I t i s sound pract i ce to assi gn inexperienced interrogators to
guard duty or to other supplementary tasks directly ;elated to
interrogation, s o that they can view the process closely before
.
tdking charge. The us e of beginning interrogators a s scr eener s
( s ee par t W) is al s o recommended.
Although t here is some limited validity in the view, frequently
expressed in interrogation pri mcrs, that the interrogation i s
essent i al l y a batfle of wits, the CI Lnterrogator who encounters a
skilled and r e s istant interrogatee should remember that a wide
* ~ h c i nt errogat or should be supported whenever possible by
qualified analysts1 review of hi s daily I1tdke"; experience has shown
that such a review wi l l r ai s e questions to be put and poLnts to be
clarified and lead to a thorough coverage of the subject in hand.
variety of aids can be made available. in th'e field or from
. .
Headquarters. (These a r e discussed in Part VIII. ) The intensely . .
personal nature of the interrogation situation makes it all the
. .
. .
-.
mor e necessary + h t the KUBARK questioner should a h not f or . .
a personal triumph but for his true goal--the acquisition of all
. C .. .
needed information by any author fied means.
V. THE INTERROGATEE
A. Types Of Sources: Intelligence Categories
Fr om the viewpoint of t he intelligence servi ce t he categories
of per sons who most frequently provide useful information i n r e -
sponse t o questioning a r e t ravel l ers; repat ri at es; defect ors, escapees,
and refugees; t r ansf er r ed sources; agents, including provocateurs,
double agents, and penetration agents; and swindlers and fabri cat ors.
1. Travel l ers a r e usually interviewed, debriefed, or Ge r i e d
through eliciting techniques. If they a r e interrogated, t he reason i s
t hat they a r e known or believed t o fall into one of t he following cate-
gori es,
2. Repatriates a r e sometimes interrogated. although other
techniques a r e used mor e often. The propri et ary i nt erest s of t he
host government will frequently dictate interrogation by a liaison
ser vi ce r at her than by KUBARK. If KUBARK i nt errogat es, t he
following preliminary steps a r e taken:
a. A records check, including local and Headquart ers
t races.
b. Testing of bona fides.
c. Determination of repat ri at e' s kind and level of
access while outside his own country.
d. Prel i mi nary assessment of motivation (including
political orientation), reliability, and capability a s observer
and report er,
e. Determination of al l intelligence or Communist
rel at i onshi ps, whether with a servi ce or party of the repat ri at e' s
own country, country of detention, or another. Full particulars
a r e needed,
3. Defect ors, escapees, and refugees a r e normally interrogated
at sufficient length t o per mi t at l east a preliminary testing of bona
f i des . The experience of t he post-war year s has demonstrated that
Soviet defect ors ( 1 ) al most ne;er defect solely or primarily because
of inducement by a West ern servi ce, (2) usually leave the USSR f or
personal r at her than ideological reasons, and (3) a r e often RIS agents.
- . -
All analyses of t he defector -refugee flow have shown that
t he Orbit s er vi ces a r e well-aware of the advantages offered by this
channel a s a means of planting t hei r agents in t arget countries.
I
4. Tr ans f er r ed sour ces r ef er r ed t o K U B m K by another service
for interrogation a r e usually sufficientl? well-known t o the t r ans-
f er r i ng servi ce so that a file has been opened. Whenever possible,
KUBARK should secure a copy of the fi l e or its full informational '.'.,..
. - .
equivalent before accepting custody.
5. Agents a r e more frequently debriefed than interrogated.
--
d
as an analytic tool. If it i s then established or
strongly suspected that the agent belongs t o one of the following
5
categories., further investigation and, eventually, i nt e~r ogat i on
usually follow.
a. Provocateur. Many provocation agents a r e walk-ins
posing as escapees, refugees, or defectors in order t o pene-
t r at e emi gre groups, ODY OKE intelligence, or other t arget s
assigned by hostile servi ces . Although denunciations by
genuine refugee s and other evidence of information obtained
f r om documents, local officials, and like sources may resul t
in exposure, the detection of provocation frequently depends
upon skilled interrogation. A l at er section of this manual
deal s with the preliminary testing of bona fide$ But the r e -
--
sul t s of preliminary testing a r e often inconclusive, and
-
detailed interrogation i s frequently essential to confession
and full revelation. Thereafter t he provocateur may be
questioned for operational and positive intelligence a s well
as counterintelligence provided that proper cognizance i s
taken of his status during the .questioning and l at er, when
r epor t s a r e prepared.
b. Double agent. The interrogation of DAIS frequently
follows a determination or strong suspicion that t he double
-
i s "giving the edge" to the adversary service. As i s al so
t r ue f or the interrogation of provocateurs, thorough pre-
liminary investigation will pay handsome dividends when
questioning gets under way. In fact , it is a baeic pr kci pl e
of interrogation that the questioner should have at his di s-
posal, before querying st ar t s, as much pertinent information
a s can be gathered without the knowledge of the prospective
i nt er r ogatee,
d. Swindlers and fabricators ar e usually interrogated
for prophylactic r easons, not for counterintelligence infor-
mation. The purpose i s the prevention or nullification of
damage t o KUBARK. to other ODYOKE servi ces
Swindlers and fabri cat ors have little of CI significance to
communicate but a r e notoriously skillful t i mewast ers . In-
t errogat i on of t hem i s nq-ually inconclusive and. if prolonged,
-
unrewarding. The professional peddler with several IS
contacts may prove an exception; but he will usually give the
-
edge t o a host security servi ce because otherwise he cannot
function with impunity. . ,
. .'- ,
B. Types of Sources: Personality Categories
The number of systems devised for categorizing human beings
i s l arge, and most of them a r e of dubious validity. Various cate-
gori cal schemes a r e outlined in t reat i ses on interrogation. The two
typologies most frequently advocated a r e psychologic -emotional and
geographic-cultural. Those who urge the f or mer ar gue that the basi c
emotional-psychological patterns do not var y significantly with t i me,
place, or culture. The l at t er school maintains the existence of a
national charact er and sub-national categories, and interrogation
guides based on t hi s principle recommend approaches tailored t o
geographical c u l t u r ~s .
It i s plainly t r ue that the interrogation source cannot be under -
stood in a vacuum, isolated from soci al context. It i s equally t r ue
that some of the most glaring blunders in interrogation (and other
operational pr ocesses) have resulted f r om ignoring t he source' s
background. Moreover, emotional-psychological s chematizations
sometimes present . atypical ext remes rat her than the 'kinds of
people commonly encountered by interrogators. Such typologies
al so cause disagreement even among professional psychiatrists
and psychologists. Interrogators who adopt t hem and who note in
an interrogatee one or two of the charact eri st i cs of I1Type A" may
mistakenly assi gn the source t o Category A and assume the r e -
maining t rai t s.
On the other hand, t here a r e valid objections t o the adoption
of cultural-geographic categories f or interrogation purposes (how-
ever valid they may be as KUCAGE concepts). The pitfalls of
ignorance of the distinctive culture of the source have '
-
The i deal solution would be to avoid all categorizing. Basic-
ally, all schemes for labelling people a r e wrong per se; applied
arbi t rari l y, ' they always produce distortions. Every interrogator
knows t hat a r e a l understanding of the individual i s worth f ar mor e
t han a thorough knowledge of this or that pigeon-hole t o which he
has been consigned. And f or interrogation purposes the ways in
' whi ch he di ffers f r om t he abst ract t ype may be more significant
t han t he ways i n which he conforms.
But KUBARK does not dispose of the t i me or personnel t o
probe the depths of each source' s individuality. In the opening
phases of interrogation, or in a quick interrogation, we a r e
compelled t o make some use of the shorthand of categorizing,
despite distortions. Like other interrogation aides, a scheme
of cat egori es i s useful only if recognized for what it is--a set
of l abel s t hat facilitate communication but a r e not the same. as
t he per sons' thus labelled. If an interrogatee l i es persistently, an
i nt errogat or may report and di smi ss him as a "pathological liar.
Yet such persons may possess counterintelligence (or other) in-
format i on quite equal in value to that held by other sources, and
t he i nt errogat or likeliest t o get at it i s the man who i s not content
with labelling but i s a s interested in why the subject l i es as in
what he l i es about,
With all of t hese reservat i ons, then, and with t he further .
observation that those who find these psychological-emotional
cat egori es pragmatically valuable should use them and those who
do not should l et them alone, the following nine types a r e described.
The cat egori es a r e based upon the fact that a person' s past i s always
refl ect ed, however dimily, i n his present ethics and behavior. Old
dogs can l ear n new t ri cks but not new ways of learning them. People
- d o change, but what appears to be new behavior or a new psychological
pat t ern i s usually just a variant on the old theme.
It i s not claimed that the classification system presented
her e i s complete; some interrogatees will not fi t into any one of
. ,
t he groupings. And like al l other typologies, the syst em i s plagued ' ..
by overiap, so that some interrogatees. will show charact eri st i cs
of mor e than one group. Above all, the interrogator must r emember
that finding some of the characteristics of t he group i n a single source
does not warrant an immediate conclusion that the source "belongs to"
the group, and that even. correct labelling i s not the equivalent of under -
standing people but merel y an aid t o understanding.
The nine maj or groups within the psychological-emotional cat e-
gory adopted for t hi s handbook a r e the following.
1. The orderl y -obstinate character. People in this category
a r e characteristically frugal, orderly, and cold; frequently they a r e
quite intellectual. They a r e not impulsive i n behavior. . They tend t o
think things through logically and to act deliberately, They often
reach decisions very slowly. They ar e f a r l es s likely t o make r eal
-....
personal sacri fi ces f or a cause than to use them as a t emporary means
of obtaining a permanent personal gain. They a r e secret i ve and di s -
inclined t o confide i n anyone el se their plans and plots,. which frequently
concern t he overthrow of some form of authority. They a r e al so stubborn,
although they may pretend cooperation or even believe that they a r e
cooperating. They nur s e grudges.
The orderly-obstinate character considers himself superi or
t o other people. Sometimes his sense of superiority i s interwoven
with a kind of magical thinking that includes all sor t s of superstitions
and fantasies about controlling his environment. He may even have a
system of morality t hat i s all his own. He sometimes grat i fi es hi s
feeling of secr et superiority by provoking unjust treatment. He al so
t r i es , charact eri st i cal l y, t o keep open a line of escape by avoiding
.? any r eal commitment t o anything. He is--and always has been--in-
tensely concerned about his personal possessions. He i s usually a
tightwad who saves everything, has a strong sense of propriety, and
i s punctual and tidy. His money and other possessions have f or him
9
a personalized quality; 'they a r e part s of himself.
He often car r i es
around shiny coins, keepsakes, a bunch of keys, and other objects
having for himself an actual or symbolic value.
usuai l Y' t he orderly-obstinate character has a history of
active rebellion, in childhood, of persistently d'oing the exact
opposite of what he i s told t o do. As an adult he may have l earned
t o cloak his resi st ance and become passive-aggressive, but hi s
determination t o get his own way i s unaltered. He has merel y
l earned how t o proceed indirectly if necessary. The profound f ear
and hat red of authority, persisting since chil&ood, i s often well-
concealed i n adulthood. For example, such a person may confess
easi l y and quickly under interrogation, even t o act s that he did not
commit, in or der t o throw t he interrogator off t he t r ai l of a sig-
nificant discovery (or, mor e r ar el y, because of feelings of guilt).
The i nt errogat or who i s dealing with an orderly-obstinate
charact er should avoid t he r ol e of hostile authority. Threat s and
threatening gest ures , table -pounding, pouncing on evasions or l i e s,
and any si mi l arl y authoritative tactics will only awaken i n such a
subject hi s old anxieties and habitual defense mechanisms. To
attain rapport , t he interrogator should be friendly. It will probably
prove rewarding if t he room and the interrogator look exceptionally
neat. Orderly-obstinate interrogatees often collect coins or other
objects a s a hobby; t i me spent in sharing their i nt erest s may thaw
some of the ice. Establishing rapport is extremely important when
dealing with t hi s type,
. .
2. The optimistic character. This kind of source i s al most
constantly happy-go-lucky, impulsive, inconsistent, and undependable.
He seems t o enjoy a continuing st at e of well-being. He may be generous
t o a fault, giving t o ot hers a s he wants to be given to. He may become
an alcoholic or drug addict. He i s not able t o withstand very much
pr es s ur e; he r eact s t o a challenge not by increasing his efforts but
r at her by running away t o avoid c o d i c t . His convictions that "some-
thing will t ur n up ", that "everything will work out all right", i s based
on his need t o avoid his own responsibility for events and depend upon
a kindly fate. ,
Such a person has usually had a great deal of' over-indulgence
in earl y life. He is somet i mes the youngest member of a l arge family,
the child of a middle-aged woman (a so-called "change -of -life baby").
If he has met severe frustrations in later childhood, he may be petu-
lant, vengeful, 'and constantly demanding.
*;
As interrogation sources, optimistic characters respond best
t o a kindly, parental approach. If withholding, they can often be handled
effectively by the Mutt-and- Jeff technique discussed l at er in this paper.
Pr essur e tactics or hostility will make them ret reat inside themselves,
whereas reassurance will bring them out. They tend t o seek promises,
t o cast the interrogator in the role of protector and problem-solver; and
it i s important that the interrogator avoid making any specific promises
that cannot be fulfilled, because the optimist turned vengeful i s likely to
prove troublesome.
3. The greedy, demanding character. This kind of person affixes
himself t o others like a leech and clings obsessively. Although extremely
dependent and passive, he constantly demands that others take car e of .
him and gratify his wishes. If he considers himself wronged, he does
.- A,--.. ... ..
not seek r edr ess through his own efforts but t r i es t o persuade another
t o take up the cudgels in his behalf--llletls you and him fight His
loyalties ar e likely t o shift whenever he feels that the sponsor whom
he has chosen has l et him down. Defectors of this type.fee1 aggrieved
because t hei r desi res were not satisfied in their codntGies of origin,
but they soon feel equally deprived in a second land and t ur n against its
government or representatives in the same way. The greedy and demand-
ing character i s subject t o rather frequent depressions. . He may direct
a desi re for revenge inward, upon himself; i n extreme cases suicide may
result.
The greedy, demanding character often suffered from very
early deprivation of affection or security. As an adult he continues to
seek substitute parents who will car e for him as his own, he feel s, did
not.
The interrogator dealing with a greedy, demanding character
must be careful not t o rebuff him; otherwise rapport will be destroyed.
- On the other hand, t he interrogator must not accede t o demands which
cannot or should not be met. Adopting the tone of an understanding
father or big brother i s likely to make the subject responsive.
If he
makes exorbitant requests, an unimportant favor may provide a sat i s-
-
' factory substitute because the demand ari ses not from a specific
need but as -an expression of the subject's need for security. He i s
likely t o find reassuring any manifestation of concern for his well-
. .
being.
In dealing with this type- -and t o a considerable extent in
dealing with any of the types herein listed--the interrogator must be
aware of the limits and pitfalls of rational persuasion. If he seeks
t o induce cooperation by an appeal t o logic, he should f i r st determine
whether the source' s resistance is based on logic. The appeal will
glance off ineffectually if the resistance is totally or chiefly emotional
rat her than rational, Emotional-resistance can be dissipated only by
emotional manipulation,
4. The anxious, self -centered character, Although this person
is fearful, he i s engaged in a constant struggle t o conceal his fears.
He i s frequently a daredevil who compensates for. his anxiety by pr e-
tending that t here i s no such thing as danger. He may be a stunt fl i er
or circus performer who "provesn himself before crowds, He may al so
be a Don Juan. He tends t o brag and often lies through hunger for approval
or praise. As a soldier or officer he may have been decorated f or bravery;
but if so, his comrades may suspect that his exploits resulted from a
pleasure in exposing himself t o danger and the anticipated delights of r e -
wards, approval, and applause. The anxious, self-centered charact er
,
is usually intensely vain and equally sensitive,
People who show these characteristics a r e actually unusually
fearful. The causes of intense concealed anxiety a r e too complex and
subtle t o permit discussion of the subject in this paper.
Of greater importance t o the interrogator than the causes i s
the opportunity provided by concealed anxiety for successful manipulation
of the source, His desi re t o i mpress will usually be quickly evident,
He i s likely t o be voluble. Ignoring or ridiculing his bragging, or
cutting him short with a demand that he get down t o cases, is likely t o
make him resentful and t o stop the flow. Playing upon his vanity,
especially by praising his courage, will usually be ' a successful tactic
if employed skillfully. Anxious, self-centered interrogatees who a r e
withholding significant facts, such as contact with a hostile service,
-
a r e likelier to divulge if made to feel that the truth wi l l not be used
to harm them and if the interrogator also st resses the callousness
and stupidity of the adversary in sending so valiant a person upon ,
so ill-prepared a mi ss ion. There is little to be gained and much to
...
be lost by exposing the nonrelcvant lies of this kind of source. Gross
lies about deeds of daring, sexual prowess, or other llproofstl of
courage and manliness ar e best met with silence or with friendly but
ll~ncommittal replies unless they consume an inordinate amount of
time. If operational use is contemplated, recruitment may some-
times be effected through such queries as, "1 wonder if you would
be willing to undertake a dangerous mi ssi on "
5. The guilt-ridden character. This k'md of person has a strong
cxuel, unrealistic conscience. His whole life seems devoted to re-
living his feelings of guilt. Sometimes he seems determined to atone;
a t other times he insists that whatever went wrong is the fault of some-
body else.' In either event he seeks constantly some proof or external
indication that the gum of others is greater than his own. He is often
caught up completely in efforts to prove that he has been treated un-
justly. In fact, ha may provoke unjust treat-ment in order to assuage
his conscience through punishment. Compulsive gamblers who find no
r eal pleasure in wb i n g but do f h d relief Zn losing belong to this class.
So do persons who falsely c d c s s to crimes. Sometimes such people
actually commit cri mes in order to confess and be punished. Masochists
also belong in this category.
The c a ~ e s of most guilt complexes a r e real or fancied wrongs
done to parents or others whom the subject felt he ought to love and
honor. As children such people may have been frequently scolded or
punished. Or they may have been l'm.odelll children wb o repressed all
natural hostilities.
The guilt-ridden character is hard to Interrogate. He may
&
"confess" to hostfle clandestine activity, or other acts of interest to
KUBARK, in which he was not involved. Accusations levelled at him
by the interrogator a r e likely to trigger such false confessions. Or
he may remain silent when accused, enjoying the llpunishment. He
i
b a poor subject for LCFLUTTER. The complexities of dealing with
conscience-ridden hterrogatees vary so widely from case to case
h t it is almost Impossible to list sound general principles. Perhaps
the best advice is that the interrogator, once alerted by information
from the screening process (see Par t YJ) br by the subject's ex-
cessive preoccupation with moral judgements, should treat as
. ,
suspect and subjective any information provided by the interrogatee.
-..,,
.. ..
'.
about any matter that is of moral concern to him. Persons wi t h
intense guilt feelings may cease resistance and cooperate Lf
punished in some way, because of the gratification induced by
punishment.
6 . The character wrecked by success is closely related
to the guilt-ridden character. This sort of person .cannot tolerate
success and goes ,through life failing at critical points. He Ls
often accident-prone. Typically he has a long history of be'mg
promising and of almost completing a significant assignment or
achievement but not bringing it off. The character who &mot
stand success enjoys his ambitions as long as they remain fan-
t as ies but somehow ensures that they will not be fulfilled in
reality. Acquaintances often feel that his success is just around
the corner, but something always intervenes. In actuality this
something is a sense of guilt, of the kind described above. The
person who avoids success has a conscience which forbids the
pleasures of accomplishment and recognition. He frequently
projects his guilt feelings and feels that all of his failure.s were
someone else' s fault. He may have a strong need to - skf er and
.may seek danger or injury.
As interrogatees these people who "cannot stand pros-
,-
perity" pose no special problem unless the hterrogation impinges
. .
upon their feelings of guilt or the reasons f or their past failures.
Then subjective distortions, not facts, wi l l result. The success-
ful interrogator will isolate this area of unreliability.
7. The schizoid or strange character lives in a world of
fantasy much of the time. Sometimes he s e e m unable to dis-
tinguish reality from the realm of his own creating. The r eal
world seems to him empty and meaningless, in contrast with
the mysteriously s ignificaat world that he has made,
H e is
extremely intolerant of any frustration that occurs in the outer
world and deals with it by withdrawal into the interior realm.
S E C ;./
He has no r eal attachments t o others, although he may attach
symbolic and private meanings or values t o other people.
' I .
Children r ear ed in homes lacking in ordinary' affection
and attention or in orphanages or state-run communes may be-
come adults who belong t o this. category. Rebuffed i n earl y
efforts t o attach t hemsel ves to another, they become distrustful
of attachments and t ur n inward. Any link t o a group or country
will be undependable and, as a rule, transitory. .At the same
t i me the schizoid charact er needs external approval. Though
he r et r eat s f r om real i t y, he does not want t o feel abandoned.
As & interrogatee the schizoid character is likely t o
l i e readily t o win approval. He wi l l t el l the interrogator what
he thinks the interrogator wants t o hear in order to wi n the award
of seeing a smile on the i nt errogat or' s face. Because he is not
always capable of distinguishing between fact and fantasy, he may
be unaware of lying. The desi re for approval provides the in-
. . .... - .. ...
t errogat or with a handle. Whereas accusations of lying or other
indications of di se st eem wi l l provoke withdrawal from the situation
teasing the t r ut h out of the schizoid subject may not prpve difficult
if he i s convinced t hat he will not incur favor through misstatements
or disfavor through telling the truth.
Like t he guilt -ridden charact er, the schizoid character
may be an unreliable subject for testing by LCFLUTTER be-
cause hi s internal needs lead him to confuse fact with fancy.
He is al so likely t o make an unreliable agent because of his
incapacity t o deal with fact s and t o form r e d relationships.
8. The exception believes that the world owes him a great
deal. He feel s that he suffered a gross injustice, usually earl y
i n life, and should be repaid. Sometimes the injustice was meted
out impersonally, by fate, as a physical deformity, an extremely
painful illness or operation in childhood, or the early 10s s of one
parent or both. Feeling that these misfortunes were undeserved,
the exceptions r egar d them a s injtlstices that someone or some-
thing must rectify. Therefore they claim a s their right privileges
not permitted others. When the claim i s ignored or denied, the
exceptions become rebellious, a s adolescents often do. They ar e
convinced t hat t he j ust i ce of the cl ai m i s p i a h f or ' al l t o s ee and
that any r ef usal to grant i t i s willfully malignant.
' ,
.
- I l r ~ rr A A C ~ I -- i ~ ~ ~ c ~ r o g a t e d , the exceptions a r e likely t o make
.'.
demands for money, reset t l ement aid, and ot her favors--demands
t hat are. compl et el y out of proportion t o the value of t hei r con-
tributions. Any ambiguous repl i es to such demands will be in-
t er pr et ed a s acqui escence. Of al l the t ypes consi dered her e, the
exception is l i kel i est t o c a r r y an alleged i nj ust i ce dealt hi m by
KUBARK t o the newspapers or the court s.
The ' best gener al line to follow in handling those who,
believe t hat they a r e exceptions i s t o l i st en attentively (within
reasonabl e t i rnel i mi t s) t o t hei r gri evances and t o make no
commi t ment s that cannot be di scharged fully. Defect ors f r om
hostile intelligence s er vi ces , doubles, provocat eurs, and ot her s
who have had mor e t han passing contact with a Sino-Soviet
ser vi ce may, if they belong t o t hi s cat egory, prove unusually
responsi ve t o suggest i ons f r om the i nt errogat or that t hey have
been t r eat ed unfai rl y by the other servi ce. Any ~ l a n n e d operat i onal
use of such per sons should take into account t he fact t hat . they have
no sense of loyalty t o a common cause and a r e likely t o t ur n
aggrievedly agai nst super i or s.
9. The average or normal char act er - i s not a per son wholly
lacking in the char act er i st i cs of the ot her t ypes. He may, in f act ,
exhibit most or al l of t hem from t i me t o t i me. But no one of t hem
i s persi st ent l y dominant; the average man' s qualities of obst i nacy,
unreal i st i c opt i mi sm, anxiety, and the r e s t are not overri di ng or
i mperi ous except for rel at i vel y short i nt erval s. Moreover, hi s
react i ons t o the world around him a r e mor e dependent upon event s
in that world and l es s t he product of ri gi d, subjective pat t er ns than
i s t r ue of the ot her t ypes di scussed.
C. Other Cl ues
The t r ue defector ( as distinguished f r om the hostile agent
in defector' s guise) i s likely to have a hi st ory of opposition to
' .
authority. The sad fact is that defectors who left t hei r homelands
. -. .,
because they could not get along with t hei r immediate or ult' ma t e
superi ors a r e al so likely to rebel against authorities in the new
environment (a fact which usually plays an important par t in re-
defection). Therefore defectors a r e likely to be found LL the ranks
of the orderly-obstinate, the greedy and demanding, the schizoids,
and the exceptions.
Exper innents and st at i s tical analyses performed a t the Univers ity
of Minnesota concerned the relationships among anxiety and affiliative
tendencies ( desi r e to be with other people), on the one hand, and t he
ordi nal position (rank in h i r e sequence) on the other. Some of the
findings, though necessari l y tentative and speculative, have some
relevance to interrogation. (30). As is noted in the bibliography, the
investigators concluded that isolation typically creat es anxiety, that
anxiety intensifies the des i r e to be with ot hers who shar e the s ame
fear, and that only and f'rrst-born children a r e mor e anxious and
l ess willing or able to withstand pain thzm later-born children. Other
applicable hypotheses a r e that fear i ncreases the aff iliative needs
of f i rst -born and only children much mor e than those of the later-born.
These differences a r e mor e pronounced in persons f r om smal l fami l i es
than in those who grew up in l arge families. Finally, only children
a r e much l i kel i er to hold themselves together and per si st in anxiety-
producing situations than a r e the first-born, who mor e frequently t r y
to r et r eat . In the other w j o r respect s - intensity of anxiety and
emotional need to affiliate - no significant dXferences between "firsts1!
and llonliesll were dis cover ed
It follows that determining the subject' s "ordinal pos ition"
before questioning begins maybe useful to the interrogator. But
two cautions a r e in order. The f i r s t is that the findings ar e, a t this
>
stage, only tentative hypotheses. The second is that even if they prove
r at e f or l ar ge groups, the data a r e like those in act uari al tables; they
have no specific predictive value for individuals.
VL SCREENING AND OTHER PRELIMINARIES
A; Screening
- some l ar ge stations a r e
able t o conduct prel i mi nary psychological screening before in-
t errogat i on st art s. The purpose of screening is to provide the
i nt errogat or, i n advance, with a reading on the type and char-
act er i st i cs of the interrogatee. It i s recommended that screening
be conducted whenever personnel and facilities permit, unless it
i s reasonabl y cert ai n that the interrogation will be of minor irn-
portance or that the i nt errogat ee i s fully cooperative,
Screening should be conducted by interviewers, not inter-
rogat ors; or at l east the subjects should not be screened. by the
same KUBARX personnel who will interrogate them l at er.
Other psychological testing aids a r e best administered b y a
trained psychologist. Test s conducted on American POW' S r e -
turned to U. S. jurisdiction in Korea during the Big and Little
Switch suggest that ~r os pe c t i ve interrogatees who show normal
emotional responsi veness on the Rorschach and' related t est s ar e
likelier t o prove cooperative under interrogation than a r e those
whose response s indicate that they a r e apathetic and emotionally
withdrawn or bar r en. Ext reme r es i s t er s , however, share the
response char act er i st i cs of collaborators; they differ in the
nat ure and i nt ensi t y of ~ o t i ~ a t l o a rzL&e?: than emotions.
anal ysi s of objective t est r ecor ds and biographical information
is a sampl e of 759 Big Switch repat ri at es revealed that men who -
had collaborated differed f r om men who had not in the following
ways:. t he col l aborat ors were older, had completed mor e years of
school, scor ed hi gher on intelligence' tests administered aft er r e-
patriation, had ser ved longer i n the Army prior to capture, and
s cor ed higher on t he Psychopathic Deviate Scale - pd. . . . However, the
5 percent of t he noncollaborator sample who resi st ed actively - who
were ei t her decorat ed by the Army or considered t o be ' reactionaries'
by t he Chinese - differed f r om the remaining group in preci sel y the
s ame di rect i on as t he collaborator group and could not be distinguished .
f r om t hi s group on any variable except age; the r es i s t er s were older
t han t he col l aborat or s!' (33)
Even a rough prel kni nary estimate, if valid, can be a boon to
the i nt errogat or because it will permit him t o st ar t with generally
sound t act i cs f r o m the beginning - t act i cs adapted to the personality
of t he source. Dr . Moloney has expressed the opinion, which we
ma y use a s an example of t hi s, that the AVH was able to get what i t
wanted f r om Cardi nal Mindszenty because the Hungarian servi ce
adapted its i nt errogat i on methods to hi s personality. "There can be
no doubt that Mindszenty' s preoccupation with the concept of becoming
secur e and powerful through the surrecder of self t o the great est
power of t hem all - hi s God idea - predisposed him t o the response
el i ci t ed i n hi s experience with the communist intelligence. Fo r him
the s ur r ender of self-system t o authoritarian-system was natural,
a s was t he ve r y principle of martyrdom. I ' (28)
The t as k of screening i s made easi er by the fact that the
s cr eener is i nt er est ed i n the subject, not i n the information which
he ma y possess. Most people--even many provocation agents who
have been t r ai ned t o reci t e a legend--will speak with some freedom
.- about childhood events and familial relationships. And even the
provocateur who substitutes a fictitious person for his r eal father
. will di scl ose s ome of his feelings about his father i n the course
of detaililig hi s s t or y about the imaginary substitute. If the screener
-
has learned to put the potential source at eas'e, to feel his way
along in each case, the source is unlikely to consider that a
casual conversation about himself if dangerous, ".
'\ ,
'\
The screener is interested in getting the subj.ect to talk about
himself. Once the flow starts, the screener should try not to stop
it by questions, gestures, or other interruptions until s a i c i e nt
information has been revealed to permit a rough determination of
type.
The subject is likeliest to talk freely if the screener' s manner
is friendly and patient. His fac'ial express ion should not reveal. special
interest in any one statement; he should just seem sympathetic and
understanding. .Witham a short time most people who have begun talking
about themselves go back to early experiences, so that merely by
listening and occasionally making a quiet, encouraging remark the
screener can learn a great deal. Routine questions about school
teachers, employers, and group leaders, for example, will lead the
subject to reveal a good deal of how he feels about his parents,
superiors, and others of emotional consequence to him because of
associative links in his mind.
It is very helpful if the screener can imaginatively place him-
self in the subject's position, The more the screener b o ws about
the subject's native ar ea and cultural background, the less' likely
is he to disturb the subject by an incongruous remark. Such comments
as, "That must have been a bad time for you and your family, " or
"Yes, I can see why you were angry, ' I or "It sounds exciting" ar e
sufficiently innocuous not to distract the subject, yet provide adequate
evidence of sympathetic interest. Taking the subject's side against
his enemies serves the same purpose, and such comments as "That
was unfair; they had no right to treat you that way1' will aid rapport
and stimulate further revelations.
It is important that gross abnormalities be spotted during the
screening process. Persons suffering from severe mental illness
will show major distortions, delusions, or halluc~hations and wi u
usually give bizarre explanations for their behavior. ~i s r n i i s a l or
prompt referral of the mentally ill to profess ional specialis t i w ill
- save time and money.
The secbnd and related purpose of screening is to permit an
educated guess about the source' s probable attitude toward the
i nt errogat i on. An est i mat e of whether the i nt er r ogat ee will be
. cooperative o r r ecal ci t r ant i s essent i al t o planning because ver y
:,
di fferent met hods a r e used in dealing with t hese two t ypes. -. ..
At st at i ons o r bases which cannot conduct screeni ng in t he
f or ma l s ens e, i t is still worth-while to refa ace any ' important in-
t er r ogat i on with a'n i nt ervi ew of the source, conducted by someone
ot her t han t he i nt er r ogat or and designed t o provide a maxi mum of
eval uat i ve i nformat i on before interrogation commence s.
Unl ess a shock effect i s desi red, the t ransi t i on f r om t he
scr eeni ng i nt er vi ew t o t he i nt errogs tion situation should not be
abrupt. At t he f i r s t meet i ng with the i nt errogat ee it is usual l y
a good i dea f or t he i nt er r ogat or t o spend some t i me i n t he s ame
kind of qui et , fri endl y exchange that charact eri zed the screeni ng
, i nt ervi ew. Even though t he i nt errogat or now has the scr eeni ng
product , t he r ough cl assi fi cat i on by type, he needs t o underst and
the subj ect i n hi s own t er ms . If he i s i mmedi at el y aggr essi ve, he
i mposes upon t he f i r s t i nt errogat i on sessi on (and t o a diminishing
ex-tent upon succeedi ng sessi ons) too ar bi t r ar y a pat t ern. As one
exper t has sai d, "Anyone who proceeds without consi derat i on fox
the di sj unct i ve power of anxiety in human rel at i onshi ps will never
l ear n i nt ervi ewi ng. " (34)
B. Ot her Pr el i mi nar y Pr ocedur es
- The / Cj
k'
pr el i mi nar y handling- of ot her types of i nt errogat i on sour ces i s us-
ually l e s s difficult, It suffi ces f or the present purpose t o l i st the
3
following pri nci pl es: a
1. All avai l abl e pertinent information* t o be assembl ed
and st udi ed before t he i nt errogat i on itself i s planned, much l es s con-
ducted. An ounc'e of investigation may be worth a pound of questions.
2. A di st i nct i on should be drawn as soon a s possible be-
-
tween s our ces who will be sent to
L
si t e organi zed and equipped for i nt errogat i on and those whose
-
i nt er r ogat i on wi.11 be compl et ed by the base o r station with which
cont act i s f i r s t est abl i shed.
. .
3 . The suggest ed pr ocedur e f or arri vi ng at a pr el i mi nar y
a s s e s s me nt of wal k-i ns r emai ns the same -
. - ['(-
. ,L4
.
--7
i
The key poi nt s a r e r epeat ed he r e f or ease of r ef er ence. These
L
pr el i mi nar y t es t s a r e desi gned t o supplement the technical
exami nat i on of a wal k-i n' s document s, substantive quest i ons
about cl ai med homel and o r occupat i on, and ot her st andard
i nqui r i es. The following quest i ons, if asked, should be posed
a s soon as possi bl e a f t e r the i ni t i al cont act , while the walk-in
is st i l l under s t r e s s and before he has adjusted to a rout i ne.
a. The walk-in may be asked to identify al l
r el at i ves and f r i ends in the a r e a , or even the count ry,
in whi ch PBPRI ME asyl um is f i r s t request ed. Tr a c e s
should be run speedi l y. Provocat i on agent s a r e :
s omet i mes di r ect ed to "defect" in t hei r t ar get a r e a s ,
and f r i ends o r r el at i ves al r eady in place may be host i l e
a s s e t s .
b. At the f i r s t i nt ervi ew the quest i oner should
be on the a l e r t f or phr as es or concepts char act er i st i c
of i nt el l i gence o r CP act i vi t y and should r ecor d such
l eads whet her i t is planned t o follow t hem by i nt errogat i on
on the spot
d
c. LCFLUTTER should be used if feasi bl e. If
not , t he wal k-i n may be asked t o undergo such t est i ng
at a l a t e r dat e. Refusal s should be r ecor ded, a s well
a s i ndi cat i ons t hat the walk-in has been bri efed on the
technique by anot her ser vi ce. The manner a s well a s
the nat ur e of t he wal k-i n' s react i on to the proposal
should be noted.
-
d. If LCFLUTTER , scr eeni ng, i nvest i gat i on , o r
any ot her met hods do est abl i sh a pr i or i nt el l i gence hi st ory,
the following mi ni mal i nformat i on should be obtained:
- .--. ..-
5. . All document s that have a bearing on the p l z n ~ e d
-
i nt errogat i on mer i t study. Documents f r om Bloc count r i es, o r , s .
t hose which a r e in any r espect unusual or unfamiliar,. a r e
cust omari l y sent to t he proper fi el d or headquart ers component
f or technical anal ysi s.
6 . If during screeni ng or any other pre-i nt errogat i on
phase i t i s ascer t ai ned that the source has been i nt errogat ed
bef or e, t hi s ' fact should be made known to t he i nt er r ogat or .
A gent s, f or exampl e, a r e accust omed to being questioned
repeat edl y and professi onal l y. So a r e per sons who have been
a r r e s t e d sever al t i mes. Peopl e who have had pr act i cal t rai ni ng
i n being i nt errogat ed become sophisticated subj ect s, abl e to
spot uncert ai nt y, obvious t r i cks , and ot her weaknesses.
C. Summar y
Screeni ng and t he ot her pr el i mi nar y pr ocedur es will hel p
t he i nt er r ogat or - and hi s base, station, . to deci de
whet her the prospect i ve source (1) i s likely t o pos s es s useful
counterintelligence because of associ at i on with a forei gn
ser vi ce or Communi st Pa r t y and ( 2) i s likely t o cooperat e
vol unt ari l y or not. Ar med with t hese est i mat es and with
what ever insights screeni ng has provided into the personal i t y
of the sour ce, the i nt er r ogat or i s ready to plan.
VII . PLANNING THE COUNTERI NTELLI GENC~
INTERROGATION
A. The Nat ur e of count eri nt el l i gence Int errogat i on
The 1ong;range pur pose of CI i nt errogat i on i s to get f r om
t he s our ce all the useful counterintelligence information that
he has . The shor t - r ange purpose i s to enl i st hi s cooperation
t owar d t hi s end o r , if he i s r esi st ant , to dest r oy hi s capacity
f o r r es i s t ance and r epl ace i t with a cooperative attitude. The
t echni ques used in nullifying r esi st ance, inducing compliance,
and event ual l y el i ci t i ng voluntary cooperation a r e di scussed in
P a r t VIII of t hi s handbook.
No two i nt er r ogat i ons a r e the same. Ever y interrogation
i s shaped definitively by the personal i t y of the source - and of
t he i nt er r ogat or , because i nt errogat i on i s an intensely :
i nt er per s onal pr oces s . The whole purpose of screeni ng and
a ma j or pur pose of t he f i r s t st age of the interrogation i s to
pr obe t he st r engt hs and weaknesses of the subject. Only when
t hes e have been est abl i shed and understood does it become
possi bl e t o-pl an r eal i st i cal l y.
Pl anni ng t he CI i nt errogat i on of a r esi st ant source r equi r es
a n underst andi ng (whet her formal i zed o r not ) of the dynamics
of confessi on. He r e Horowi t z' s study of the nat ure of confession
i s per t i nent . He s t a r t s by asking why confessions occur at al l .
"Why not al ways br azen i t out when confronted b y accusat i on?
Why does a per s on convict himself through a confession, when,
a t t he ver y wor s t , no confession would leave hi& at l east a s
w el l off (and possi bl y bet t er off). . . ?I' He answer s that
conf essi ons obtained without dur es s a r e usual l y the product
of t he following conditions:
1. - The per son i s accused explicitly or implicitly and f eel s
accused.
2. As a r esul t hi s psychological f r eedom - the extent to . ,
which he f eel s abl e to do what he want s to - i s curt ai l ed. Thi s
. .-.
feel i ng need not correspond to confinement o r any ot her ext ernal
r eal i t y .
3 . The accused f eel s defensive because he i s on unsure
ground. He does not b o w how much t he accuser knows. As a
r esul t t he accused "has no f or mul a f or pr oper behavi or, no r ol e
if you wi l l , that he can utilize in t hi s situation.
4. He per cei ves t he accuser as represent i ng aut hori t y.
Unl e s s he bel i eves t hat the accus er ' s powers f ar exceed hi s
own, he i s unlikely to f eel hemmed in and defensive. And if
he "percei ves t hat the accusation i s backed by ' r eal ' evi dence,
the r at i o of ext ernal f or ces to hi s own f or ces i s i ncr eased and t he
per s on' s psychological position i s now mor e pr ecar i ous. It i s
i nt erest i ng to note t hat i n such situations the accused tends
t oward over r esponse, or exaggerat ed response; to host i l i t y
and emotional di spl ay; to self-righteousne ss, to counter
1 I
accusat i on, to defense. . . .
5 . He must believe that he i s cut off fr.om fri endl y or
supporting f or ces. If he does, he himself becomes the only
sour ce of hi s " salvation.
I
6. "Another condition, which i s mos t probably neces s ar y,
though not sufficient f or confession, i s t hat the accused per s on
f eel s guilt. A possi bl e r eason i s t hat a sense of guilt pr omot es
sel f-host i l i t y. " It should be equally cl ear that if the per son
does not f eel guilt he i s not in hi s own mind guilty and will not
confess to an act which ot hers may r egar d as evil or wrong and
he, i n f act , consi der s cor r ect . Confession i n such a case can come
only with dur es s even where all ot her conditions previously.
mentioned may prevai l .
7. The accused, finally, i s pushed f ar enough along the
path toward confession that it i s easier for hi m to keep going
than to t urn back. He percei ves confession a s the only way out
of hi s predi cament and into freedom.
(15)
~ o i o wi t z has been quoted and summarized at some length
because it i s considered t hat the foregoing i s a basically sound
account of the pr ocesses that evoke confessions f r om sources
whos e r esi st ance i s not strong at the outset, who have not
previously-been confronted with detention and interrogation,
and who have not been trained by an adversary intelligence or
securi t y servi ce i n resi st ance techniques. A fledgling or
disaffected Communist o r agent, for example, might be brought
to confession and cooperation without the use of any external
coercive f or ces other than the interrogation situation itself,
through the above-described progression of subjective events.
It is important to understand that interrogation, as both
situation and pr oces s , does of itself exert significant external
pr es s ur e upon the i nt errogat ee a s long a s he i s not permitted
to accust om himself to it. Some psychologists t race this effect
back to infantile relationships. Meerlo, f or example, says that
every verbal relationship repeat s to some degree the
of earl y verbal relationships between child and parent.
( 27)
An i nt errogat ee, in par t i cul ar , i s likely to see the interrogator
a s a parent o r parent-symbol, an object of suspicion and
r esi st ance o r of submissive acceptance. I the interrogator
i s unaware of t hi s unconcsious process, the resul t can be a
confused battle of submerged attitudes, in which the spoken
words a r e often merel y a. cover for the unrelated struggle
being waged at lower l evel s of both personalities. On the
ot her hand, the i nt errogat or who does understand these fact s
and who b o ws how to t ur n t hem to hi s advantage may not need
to r e s or t to any pr es s ur es great er than those that flow directly
f r om the interrogation setting and function.
Obviously, many resi st ant subjects of counterintelligence
interrogation cannot be brought to cooperation, or even to
compliance, mer el y through pr essur es which they generate
within t hemsel ves or through the unreinforced effect of the
interrogation situation. Manipulative techniques - still keyed
to the individual but brought to bear upon hi m f r om outside
himself - then become necessary. It is a fundamental
hypothesis of t hi s handbook that these techniques, which can
succeed even with highly resi st ant sources, a r e in essence
met hods of inducing regressi on of the personality to what-
ever ear l i er and weaker level i s required f or the dissolution
of resi st ance and the inculcation of dependence. All of the
techniques employed to break through a n interrogation
roadblock,. the ent i re spect rum f r om simple isolation to
hypnosis and nar cosi s, a r e essentially ways of speeding up
the pr ocess of regressi on. As t he interrogatee slips back
f r om mat uri t y toward a mor e infantile st at e, hi s l earned or
st ruct ured personality t r ai t s fall away in a r ever sed
chronological or der , so t hat the charact eri st i cs most recently
acquired - which a r e al so the charact eri st i cs drawn upon by
the i nt errogat ee in hi s own defense - a r e the f i r s t to go. As
Gill and Brenman have pointed out, regressi on i s basically a
l os s of autonomy. (13)
Another key to the successful interrogation of the resi st i ng
source i s the provision of an acceptable rationalization for
yielding. As regressi on proceeds, al most all r es i s t er s feel
the growing i nt ernal s t r e s s that r esul t s f r om wanting
simultaneously to conceal and to divulge. To escape the
mounting tension, the source may gr asp a t any face-saving
reason f or compliance - any explanation which will placate
both hi s own conscience and the possible wrat h of f or mer
superi ors and associ at es if he i s ret urned to Communist
control. It i s the busi ness of the i nt errogat or to provide
the right rationalization at the right time. Here too the
importance of understanding the interrogatee i s evident; the
right rationalization must be an excuse or reason that i s
tailored to the sour ce' s personality.
The interrogation pr ocess i s a continuum,. and everything
that t akes place in the continuum influences all subsequent
events. The continuing pr ocess, being i nt erpersonal , i s not
-
S E C . E T
/
-
r ever si bl e. Ther ef or e it i s wrong to open a counterintelligence
i nt errogat i on experi ment al l y, intending to abandon unfruitful
appr oaches one by one until a sound method i s di scovered by . .
chance. The f ai l ur es of the i nt errogat or, hi s painful r et r eat s
f r o m blind al l eys, bol st er the confidence of the source and
i ncr ease hi s ability to r esi st . While the i nt errogat or i s
st ruggl i ng to l ear n f r om the subject the f act s that should have
been est abl i shed before interrogation st ar t ed, t he subject i s
l earni ng mor e and mor e about the i nt errogat or.
B. The Int errogat i on Pl an
Planning f or i nt errogat i on i s mor e i mport ant than the
speci fi cs of t he plan. Because no two i nt errogat i ons a r e
al i ke, the i nt errogat i on cannot real i st i cal l y be planned f r om
A t o 2 , i n all i t s par t i cul ar s, at the outset. But i t can and
mu s t be planned f r om A to F or A to M. The chances of
f ai l ur e in an unplanned CI interrogation a r e unacceptably
high. Even wor s e, a "dash-on-regardless" approach can
r ui n t he pr ospect s of success even if sound met hods a r e
used l at er .
The intelligence category to which the subject belongs,
though not det ermi nant f or planning pur poses, i s st i l l of
s ome significance. The plan f or the i nt errogat i on of a
t r avel l er di f f er s f r o m that for other types because the
-
t i me avai l abl e f or questioning i s often brief. The examination
of hi s bona f i des, accordi ngl y, i s often l es s searchi ng. He
i s usually r egar ded as reasonably rel i abl e if hi s identity and
f r eedom f r o m ot her intelligence associ at i ons have been
est abl i shed, if r ecor ds checks do not produce derogat ory
i nformat i on, *if hi s account of hi s background i s f r ee of
omi ssi ons o r di screpanci es suggesting significant withholding,
if he does not at t empt to elicit information about the quest i oner
o r hi s sponsor , and if he willingly provi des detailed information
whi ch appear s rel i abl e or i s established a s such.
Defect ors can usually be i nt errogat ed uni l at eral l y, at
l eas t f 0r . a t i me. Pr e s s ur e for part i ci pat i on will usually
come f r o m an ODYOKE intelligence
component. The t i me available f or uni l at eral t est i ng and
exploitation should be calculated a t the out set , with a f ai r
r egar d f or the r i ght s and i nt er est s of ot her member s of the
intelligence community. The most significant si ngl e f act to be
kept in mind when planning the i nt errogat i on of Soviet defect ors
i s that a cert ai n percent age of t hem have proven to be controlled
agent s; est i mat es of t hi s percentage have r anged- as high a s
Juri ng a period of s ever al year s af t er 1955.
( 2 2 )
KUBARK's l ack of executive power s i s especi al l y significant
if the i nt errogat i on of a suspect agent o r of any ot her subject
who i s expected to r e s i s t i s under consi derat i on. As a gener al
r ul e, it i s difficult to succeed in the GI i nt errogat i on. of a
r esi st ant source unl ess the interrogating ser vi ce c 6 cont rol
the subject and his environment for a s l ong as pr oves necessar y.
-
C. The Specifics
1. The Specific Purpose
Before questioning s t ar t s , the interrogator has cl earl y
in mind what he wants to l ear n, why he thinks the source has the
information, how important it i s, and how it can best be obtained.
Any confusion her e, or any questioning based on the pr emi se
that the purpose will take shape aft er the interrogation i s under
way, i s almost cert ai n to lead to airnle ssness and final fai l ure.
If the specific goals cannot be discerned cl earl y, furt her
investigation i s needed before querying st ar t s.
2 . Resistance
The kind and intensity of anticipated resi st ance i s
estimated. It i s useful to recognize in advance whether the
information desi red would be threatening or damaging in any
way to the i nt erest s of the interrogatee. If so, the i nt errogat or
should consider whether the same information, or confirmation
of i t , can be gained f r om another source. Questioning suspect s
immediately, on a fl i msy factual basi s, will .usually cause
~ t e of t i me, not save it. On the other hand, if the needed
information i s not sensitive f r om the subject' s viewpoint,
mer el y asking f or i t i s usually preferable to trying to t r i ck
hi m into admi ssi ons and thus creating an unnecessary battle
of wits.
The prel i mi nary psychological analysis of the subject
ma k e s it eas i er to decide whether he i s likely to r es i s t and,
if so, whether hi s resi st ance will be the product of fear that
hi s personal i nt er est s will be damaged or the resul t of the
non-cooperative nat ure of orderly-obstinate and related
types. The choice of methods to be used in overcoming
r esi st ance i s al so det ermi ned by the charact eri st i cs of the
i nt errogat ee.
3. The Interrogation Setting
The r oom i n which the interrogation i s to be conducted
should be f r e e of di st ract i ons. The colors of walls, ceiling,
r ugs , and furni t ure should not be startling. Pi ct ures should be
mi s s i ng or d d l . Whether the furni t ure should include a desk
depends not upon the i nt errogat or' s convenience but rat her upon
the subject1 s anticipated react i on to connotations of superiority
and officialdom. A pl ai n table may be preferable. An over-
s t df ed chair f or t he use of the interrogatee i s sometimes
preferabl e t o a straight-backed, wooden chair because if he
i s made t o stand f or a lengthy period or i s otherwise deprived
of physical comfort , the cont rast i s intensxied and i ncreased
disorientation resul t s. Some t r eat i ses on interrogation a r e
emphatic about the value of arrangi ng the lighting so that i t s
source i s behind the interrogator and gl ares directly at the
subject. He r e , t oo, a f l a t rul e i s unrealistic. The effect
upon a cooperative source i s inhibitory, and the effect upon
a withholding source may be t o make hi m more stubborn.
Like all ot her det ai l s, t hi s one depends upon the personality
of the i nt errogat ee.
Good planning will prevent interruptions. If the
r oom i s al so used f or purposes other than interrogation, a
"Do Not Disturb" si gn or i t s equivalent should hang on the
door when questioning i s under way. The effect of someone
wandering in because. he forgot hi s pen or wants to invite the
S E C / . . E T
-
i nt errogat or to lunch can be devastating. For the same r eason
t her e should not be a telephone in the room; i t i s cer t ai n to
ri ng a t preci sel y the wrong moment , Mor eover , i t i s a vi si bl e . ,
. '-.
link "- "L - - ..' -: " -
LU LUG UULYLUC; its presence makes a subject f eel l e s s cut-
off, bet t er abl e to r esi st .
The i nt errogat i on r oom affords ideal conditions f or
photographing the i nt errogat ee without hi s bowl edge by
concealing a camer a behind a pi ct ure or el sewhere.
l a new safehouse i s to be used a s t he i nt errogat i on
si t e, it should be studied carefully to be sur e t hat the t ot al
environment can be manipulated as desi r ed. For exampl e,
t he el ect r i c cur r ent should be known in advance, so t hat
t r ansf or mer s o r .other modifying devi ces will be on hand. if
needed.
Arrangement s a r e usually rnade to r ecor d t he
i nt errogat i on, t r ansmi t it to another r oom, o r do both. Most
experienced i nt er r ogat or s do not l i ke t o t ake not es. Not being
saddled with t hi s chore l eaves t hem f r e e t o concent rat e on
what sour ces say, how they say i t , and what el se they do
while talking o r l i st eni ng. Another r eason f or avoiding note-
taking i s that i t di st r act s and somet i mes wor r i es t he i nt errogat ee.
In the course of sever al sessi ons conducted without note-taking,
the subject i s likely t o fal l into the comfortable illusion t hat
he i s not talking f or t he record. Another advantage of t he tape
i s that it' can be played back l at er . Upon some subj ect s the
shock of heari ng t hei r own voices unexpectedly i s unnerving.
The r ecor d al so pr event s l at er twistinqs o r deni al s of
adrnis sions.
A recordi ng
i s al so a valuable t rai ni ng aid for i nt er r ogat or s, who by t hi s
- _
-
means can study t hei r mi st akes and their. most effective
techniques. Exceptionally instructuve interrogations, or
selected portions t hereof, can al so be used in the training
of ot hers.
If possible, audio equipment should also be used
to t ransmi t the proceedings to another room, used as a
listening .post. The mai n advantage of t ransmi ssi on i s that
i t enables the person in charge of the interrogation to note
cruci al points and map furt her strategy, replacing one
i nt errogat or with another, timing a dramat i c interruption
correct l y, etc. It i s al so helpful to install a small blinker
bulb behind' the subject or to ar r ange some other method
of signalling t he i nt errogat or, without the source' s knowledge,
that the questioner should l eave the room f or consultation
or that someone el se is about to enter.
4. The Part i ci pant s
Int errogat ees ar e normally questioned separately.
Separation per mi t s the use of a number of techniques that
would not be possible otherwise. It al so intensifies i n the
source the feeling of being cut off f r om friendly aid. Confrontation
of two or Tnore suspect s with each other i n or der t o produce
recri mi nat i ons or admissions i s especially dangerous if not
preceded by separat e interrogation sessi ons which have evoked
compliance f r om one of the i nt errogat ees, or a t l east significant
admissions involving both. Techniques for the separate
interrogations of linked sources a r e discussed in Pa r t IX.
The number of i nt errogat ors used f or a single
interrogation case var i es f r om one Tnan to a l arge team.
The si ze of the t eam depends on several considerations,
chiefly the importance of the case and the intensity of source
resi st ance. Although most sessi ons consist of one interrogator
and one i nt errogat ee, some of the techniques described l at er
call f or the presence of two, t hr ee, or four i nt errogat ors. The
two-man t eam, in part i cul ar, i s subject to unintended antipathies
and conflicts not called for by assigned rol es. Planning and
subsequent conduct should eliminate such cross-currents
before they develop, especially because the source will
seek to turn t hem to hi s advantage.
Team members who a r e not otherwise engaged can
be employed to best advantage at the listening post. Inexperienced
interrogators find that listening to the interrogation while it i s in
progress can be highly educational.
Once questioning st ar t s, the interrogator i s called
upon to function at two levels. He i s trying t o do two seemingly
contradictory things at once: achieve rapport with' the subject
but remain an essentially detached observer. Or he may.
project' himself to the resi st ant interrogatee as powerful and
ominous (in order to eradicz.te resistance and create the
necessary conditions f or rapport) while rernaining wholly
uncommitted at the deeper level, noting the signilicance of
the subject' s reactions and the effectiveness of hi s own
performance. Poor interrogators often confuse this bi-level
functioning with role-playing, but there i s a vital difference.
The interrogator who merel y pretends, in hi s surface performance,
to feel a given emotion or to hold a given attitude toward the
source i s likely to be unconvincing; the source quickly senses
the deception. Even children ar e very quick to feel this kind
,
of pretense. To be persuasive, the sympathy or anger must
be genuine; but to be useful, i t must not interfere with the
deeper level .of preci se, unaffected observation. Bi-level
functioning i's not difficult or even unusual; most people act
at times as both performer and observer unless their
emotions a r e so deeply involved in the situakion that the
critical faculty disintegrates. Through experience the
interrogator becomes adept in this dualism. The interrogator
who finds that he has become emotionally involved and is
no longer capable of unimpaired objectivity should report
the fact s so that a substitution can be made. Despite all
planning efforts to select an interrogator whose age,
- background, ski l l s, personality, and experiedce make
him the best choice for the job, it sometimes happens
that both questioner and subject feel , when they f i r st meet,
an immediate at t ract i on or antipathy which i s so strong that
a change of i nt errogat ors quickly becomes essential. No
i nt errogat or should be reluctant to notify hi s superior when
emotional involvement becomes evident. Not the reaction
but a fai l ure to r epbr t i t would be evidence of a l ack of
professionalism.
Other r easons f or changing interrogators should be
anticipated and avoided a t the outset. During the f i r s t part
of the interrogation the developing relationship between the
questioner. and the initially uncooperative source i s more
importailt than the information obtained; when this relationship.
i s dest royed by a change of interrogators, the replacement
mu s t s t ar t nearl y f r o m scratch. In fact , he st art s with a
handicap, because exposure to interrogation will have made
the source a mor e effective resi st er. Therefore the base,
station, should not assign as chief interrogator
a per son whose availability will end before the estimated
completion of the case.
5. The Timing
Before interrogation st ar t s, the amouht of time
probably requi red and probably available to both interrogator
and i nt errogat ee should be calculated. Lf the subject i s not
to be under detention, hi s normal schedule i s ascertained
in advan-ce, so that he will not have to be released at a critical
point because he ha s an appointment or has to go to work.
Because pulling information f r om a recalcitrant
subject is the har d way of doing business, interrogation should
not begin until all pertinent fact s available f r om overt and f r om
t cooperative sour ces have been assembled.
Interrogation sessi ons with a resi st ant source who i s
under detention should not be held on an unvarying schedule.
4 -
The capacity for resi st ance i s diminished by disorientation.
The subject nay be left alone for days; and he may be returned
to hi s cel l , allowed to sleep for five minutes, and brought back
-
to an i nt errogat i on which i s conducted as though eight hour s had
i nt ervened. The pri nci pl e i s that sessi0n.s should be so planned
a s to di sr upt the sour ce' s sense of chronological or der .
- ,
. . ,
6. The Termi nat i on
The end of an i nt errogat i on should be planned before
questioning s t ar t s . The kinds of quest i ons asked, the methods
empl oyed, and even t he goals sought may be shaped by what
w i l l happen when the end i s reached.
. -
. Lf he i s t o be r el eased upon the l ocal economy,
per haps bl ackl i st ed as a suspect ed host i l e agent but not subjected
to subsequent counterintelligence survei l l ance, i t i s i mport ant
to avoid a n inconclusive ending that has warned the i nt errogat ee
of our doubts but has est abl i shed nothing. The poor est i nt errogat i ons
a r e t hose t hat t r ai l off into an inconclusive nothingness.
A number of pr act i cal t er mi nal det ai l s should al so
be consi dered i n advance. Ar e the sour ce' s document s to be
r et ur ned t o him, and wi l l they be avai l abl e i n t i me? Is he
to be pai d? If he i s a f abr i cat or or host i l e agent , has he been
photographed and fi ngerpri nt ed? Ar e subsequent cont act s
necessar y o r desi r abl e, and have recont act provi si ons been
ar r anged ? Has a qui t -cl ai m been obt ai ned?
As was noted a t the beginning of t hi s sect i on, t he
successful i nt errogat i on of a st rongl y r esi st ant sour ce ordi nari l y
involves two key pr ocesses: the calculated r egr essi on of the
i nt er r ogat ee and the provi si on of an accept abl e rationalization.
Lf t hese two st eps have been t aken, i t becomes ver y i mport ant
to clinch t he new t ract abi l i t y by means of conversi on. In
ot her wor ds, a subj ect who has finally divulged the information
sought and who has been given a r eason f or divulging which sal ves
hi s sel f - est eem, hi s consci ence, or both, will often be i n a mood
to take the fi nal st ep of accepting the i nt errogat orl . s val ues and
-
making common cause with hi m. L operat i onal use i s now
S E C /
contemplated, conversion i s imperative. But even if the source
has no f ur t her value after hi s fund of information has been mined,
. ,
spending some ext r a t i me with hi m in or der to replace hi s new , ....,
sense of empt i ness with new values can be good insurance. B i i
non-Communist ser vi ces a r e bothered at t i mes by disgruntled
exi nt errogat ees who pr es s demands and t hreat en or take hostile
action if the demands a r e not satisfied. Defectors in part i cul ar,
because they a r e often hostile toward any kind of authority,
cause trouble by threatening or bringing sui t s in local court s,
arrangi ng publication of vengeful st ori es, or going to the local
police. The f or me r interrogatee i s especially likely to be a
fut ure trouble-maker if during inter rogation he was subjected
to a f o r m of compulsion imposed f r om outside himself. Ti me
spent , aft er the interrogation ends, in fortifying the source' s
sense of acceptance i n the interrogator' s world may be only a
fract i on of the t i me requi red to bottle up hi s attempts to gain
revenge. Moreover, conversion may creat e a useful and
enduring asset . (See al so remarks in VIII B 4. )
VIII. THE NON-COERCIVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATION
A. General Remar ks
The t e r m non-coercive i s used above to denote methods of
interrogation -that a r e not based upon the coercion of an unwilling
subject through the employment of superior force originating out-
si de hi msel l . However, the non-c oercive interrogation i s not
conducted without pr es s ur e. On the contrary, the goal i s to gen-
er at e maximum pr es s ur e, or at least a s much a s i s needed to induce
compliance; The difference i s that the pr essur e i s generated inside
the i nt errogat ee. His resi st ance is sapped, his urge to yield i s
fortified, until i n the end he defeats himself.
Manipulating the subject psychologically until he becomes
c ompliant, without applying external methods of forcing him to
submit, sounds har der than it is. The initial advantage ' lies with
the i nt errogat or. Fr o m the outset, he knows a great deal mor e
about the source than the source knows about him. And he can
cr eat e and amplify anreffect of omniscience i n a number of ways.
For example, he can show the interrogatee a thick file bearing his
own name. - Even i f the file contains little or nothing but blank
paper, the air of fami l i ari t y with which the i nt errogat or . refers to
the subject' s background can convince some sources that all is
known and t hat resi st ance is futile.
.
I the i nt errogat ee is under detention, the interrogator can
al s o manipulate his environment. Merely by cutting off all other
human contacts, "the i nt errogat or monopolizes the social environ-
- ment of the source. "(3) He exercises' the powers of an all-powerful
parent , determining when the source will be sent to bed, when and
-
what he will eat , whether he will be rewarded f or good behavior o r
punished f or being bad. The interrogator can and does make the
-
subj ect ' s worl d not only unlike the world ' to which he had been
.
accust omed but al s o st r ange in itself - a worl d in which f ami l i ar
pat t er ns of t i me, space, and sensor y perception a r e overt hrown.
He can shi ft the envi ronment abruptly. Fo r example, a sour ce who '-.
r ef uses t o t al k at all can be placed i n unpleasant sol i t ary confine-
ment f or a t i me. Then a fri endl y soul t r eat s hi m to an unexpected
wal k i n t he woods. Experiencing relief and exhilaration, t he subj ect
wi l l usually find it i mpossi bl e not t o respond t o innocuous comment s
on t he weat her and t he fl owers. These a r e expanded t o include
r emi ni scences, and soon a precedent of ver bal exchange has been
est abl i shed. Both t he Germans and the Chi nese have used t hi s t r i ck
effectively..
The i nt er r ogat or a l s o chooses the emotional key o r keys i n
which t he i nt errogat i on o r any par t of i t wi l l be played.
- . - -
Because of t hese and other advantages, ".
- L
B. The St ruct ure of t he Interrogation
A count eri nt el l i gence interrogation consi st s of four part s:
tP.e opening, the , reconnai ssance, t he detailed questioning . and t he
conclusion-
1. The Opening
Most r es i s t ant i nt errogat ees block off acces s to signifi-
cant count eri nt el l i gence in t hei r posgessi on f or one or mor e of
four r easons. The f i r s t i s a specific negative react i on to
the i nt er r ogat or . Poor i ni t i al handling o r a fundamental ant i -
pathy can mak- : n l rce uncooperative even if he has nothing
s i gns i car t o r damaging to conceal. The second cause i s t hat
some sour ces a r e r esi st ant "by nat ur e" - i. e, by ear l y
conditioning - t o any compliar,ce with authority. The t hi rd is
-
t hat t he subj ect bel i eves that the information sought wi l l be
damaging or incriminating for him personally ,hat cooperation
with the i nt errogat or will have consequences more painful
f or him than the resul t s of non-cooperation. The fourth is
ideological resi st ance. The source has identified himself
with a cause, a political movement or organization, o r an
opposition i ~t el l i gence service. Regardless of his attitude
toward the i nt er r ogat or , ' hi s own personality, and his f e a r s
for the i ut ure, the person who i s deeply devoted to a hostile
cause will ordinarily prove strongly resi st ant under interroga-
tion.
A principal goal during the opening phase i s to confi rm
the personality assessment obtained through screening and t o
allow the i nt errogat or t o gain a deeper understanding of the
source as an individual. Unless time is cruci al , the i nt erroga-
t or should not become impatient if the interrogatee wanders
f r om the purposes of the interrogation and r ever t s to personal
concerns. Significant fact s not produced during screeni ng may
be revealed, The screening report itself is brought t o life,
the type becomes an individual, a s the subject talks. And
somet i mes seemingly rambling monologues about personal
mat t er s a r e preludes t o significant admissions. Some people
cannot bring themselves t o provide information that' puts them
in an unfavorable light until, through a lengthy prefatory
rationalization, they feel that they have s et the stage, that the
i nt errogat or Gi l l now understand why they acted as they did.
If facelsaving i s necessar y to the interrogatee, i t will be a
waste of t i me t o t r y t o force him to cut the prel i mi nari es short
and get down t o cases. In his view, he is dealing with t he
important topic, the why. He will be offended and may become
-
wholly uncooperative if faced with insistent demands f or the
naked what.
There is another advantage in l e t t i ~ g the subject t al k
freel y and even ramblingly in the f i r st stage of i nt erroga-
tion. The i nt errogat or is f r ee t o observe. Human beings
communicate a great deal by non-verbal means. Skilled
i nt errogat ors, f or example, listen closely t o voices and l earn
a great deal f r om them. An interrogation i s not mer el y a
verbal performance; it is a vocal performance, and t he
voice projects tension, fear, a dislike of cert ai n topics, and
other useful pieces of information. It is al so helpful to watch
:,
the subject' s mouth, which i s as a rule much more, revealing
than hi s eyes. Gestures and postures al s o t el l a st ory; If
a subject normally gesticulates broadly at t i mes and is at
other t i mes physically relaxed but at some point sits stiffly
motionless, his posture is likely to be t he physical i mage of
his ment al tension. The io' terrogator should make a ment al
note of the topic that caused such a reaction.
One textbook on interrogation lists the following physical
indicators of emotions and recommends that i nt errogat ors
note them, not as conclusive proofs but as assessment aids:
(1)
A ruddy or flushed face is an indication of anger
or embarrassment but not necessari l y of guilt.
( 2)
A "cold sweatt1 is a strong sign of f ear and shock.
( 3)
A pale face indicates fear and usually shows that
the interrogator is hitting cl ose t o the . mark.
(4)
A dr y mouth denotes nervousness.
( 5 )
Nervous tension i s al so shown by wringing a
handkerchief or clenching the hands tightly.
( 6 )
Emotional st rai n o r tension may cause a pumping
of the heart which becomes visible i n the pulse
and throat.
(7) A slight gasp, holding the breat h, o r an unsteady
voice may bet ray the sub jcct.
(8)
Fidgeting may take many f or ms, all of which arc
good indications of nervousnes s .
-
( 9)
A man under emotional st rai n or nervous tension
will involuntarily draw his elbows to his sides. It
i s a protective defense mechanism.
'.
(10)
The movement of the: foot when one leg i s cr ossed
over the knee of the other can serve as an indicator.
The circulation of the blood t o the lower l eg is
partially cut off, thereby causing a slight lift or
movement of the f r ee foot with each heart beat.
This becomes more pronounced and observable
as the pulse rat e i ncreases.
Pauses a r e al s o significant. Whenever a person i s
talking about a subject of consequence t o himself, he goe s through
a pr ocess of advance self-monitoring, performed at lightning
speed. Thi s self-monitoring is more intense if the person i s
talking t o a st ranger and especially intense if he is answering
the st r anger ' s questions. Its purpose is t o keep f r om the
questioner any guilty information or information that would be
damaging to the speaker' s self-esteem. When questions or
answers get close t o sensitive ar eas , the pre-scanning is
likely to creat e ment al blocks. These in turn produce unnatural
pauses, meaningless sounds designed t o give the speaker mor e
time, or other interruptions. It is not easy to distinguish
between innocent blocks -- things held back for reasons of
personal prestige -- and guilty blocks -- things the i nt erro-
gat or needs to know. But the successful establishment of
rapport -wi l l tend t o eliminate innocent blocks, or at l eas t to
keep t hem to a minimum.
The establishment of rapport i s the second principal
purpose of the opening phase of the interrogation. Sometimes
the i nt errogat or knows in advance, as a result of screening,
that the subject will be uncooperative . At other t i mes the
probability of resi st ance is established without screening:
detected hostile agents, for example, usually have not only
the will t o r es i s t but also the means, through a cover st ory or
other explanation. But the anticipation of withholding i ncreases
r at her than diminishes, the value of rapport. In other words,
a l ack of rapport may cause an interrogatee to withhold
information that he would otherwise provide freel y, whereas
' ,
the existence of rapport may induce an interrogatee who is
-.
izitizlly determined t o wicAhe?d to change his attitude. The r e -
i
fore the i nt errogat or must not become hostile if confronted
with initial hostility, or i n any other way confirm such
negative attitudes as he may encounter at the outset. During
this f i r s t phase his attitude should remai n business-like but
al so quietly (not ostentatiously) friendly and welcoming.
Such opening r emar ks by subjects as, "1 know what you
so-and-so' s a r e aft er, and I can t el l you right now that
you' re not' going t o get it f r om me" a r e best handled by an
unperturbed "Why don' t you t el l me what has made you angr y?"
At this stage the i nt errogat or should avoid being drawn into
conflict, no mat t er how provocatory may be the attitude o r
language of the interrogatee. I he meet s truculence with
neither i nsi ncere protestations that hc is the subject' s Ifpal"
nor an equal anger but r at her a cal m i nt erest in what has
aroused the subject, the interrogator has gained two advantages
right at the start. He has established the superiority that he
wi l l need l at er, as t he questioning develops, and he has i ncreased
the chances of establishing rapport.
How long the opening phase continues depends upon how
long it t akes to establish rapport or t o determine that volun-
t ar y cooperation is unobtainable. It may be l i t eral l y a mat t er
of seconds, or it may be a drawn-out, up-hill battle. Even
though the cost i n time and patience is sometimes high, the
effort t o make the subject feel that his questioner is a
sympathetic figure should not be abandoned until all reasonable
r esour ces have been exhausted (unless, of course, the i nt erro-
gation does not mer i t much time). Othelwise, the chances a r e
that the interrogation will not produce optimum resul t s. In
fact , it i s likely t o be a failure, and the i nt errogat or should
not be dissuaded f r om the effort to establish rapport by an
inward conviction that no man in 'his right mind would i ncri mi -
nate himself by providing the kind of information that i s sought.
The hi st ory of interrogation i s full of confessions and other
self-incriminations that were in essence the result of a substi-
tution of the interrogation world for the world outside. In
-
other words, a s the sights and sounds 'of an outside world fade
away, i t s significance f or the interrogatee tends to do like-
wise. That world is replaced by the interrogation room, i t s
. ,
two occupants, and the dynamic relationship between them,
.
As interrogation goes on, the subject tends increasingly t o
divulge or withhold i n accordance with the values of the .
interrogation world rat her than those of the outside world
(unless the periods of questioning a r e only brief interruptions
i n hi s normal life). In t hi s smal l world of two inhabitants a
cl ash of personalities -- as distinct f r om a conflict of purposes --
assumes exaggerated force, like a tornado in a wind-tunnel. The
self-esteem of the interrogatee and of the interrogator becomes
involved, and the interrogatee fights t o keep his secr et s f r om
his opponent f or subjective reasons, because he is gri ml y
determined not t o be the l oser, the inferior. If on the ot her
hand the interrogator establishes rapport, the subject may
withhold because of other reasons, but his resistance often
l acks the bitter, last-ditch intensity that resul t s if the contest
becomes personalized..
The i nt errogat or who senses o r determines in the opening
phase that what he is hearing is a legend should r es i s t the f i r s t ,
nat ural impulse t o demonstrate its falsity. In some' i nt erro-
gatees the ego-demands, the need to save face, a r e so i nt er-
twined with preservation of the cover st or y that calling the man
a liar will merel y intensify resistance. It i s better to leave
an avenue of escape, a loophole which permits the source to
cor r ect his st ory without looking foolish.
If it is decided, much l at er in the interrogation, to
confront the interrogatee wi t h proof of lying, the following
rel at ed advice about legal cross-examination may prove
helpful .
"Much depends upon the sequence in which one conducts
the cross-examination df a dishonest witness. You should
never hazard the important question until you have laid the
foundation f or it in such a way that, when confronted with t he
fact, the witness can neither deny nor explain it. One often
s ees the most damaging documentary evidence, i n the f or ms
of l et t er s or affidavits, fal l absolutely flat as bet r ayer s of
,
falsehood, mer el y because of the unskillful way i n which t h e y ' .. .,.
a r e hacdled. If p'=, fizv9 ia your possession a l et t ey-wri t t en
by the witness, i n which he taJses an opposite position on some
part of the case t o the one he has just sworn to, avoid the
common e r r or of showing the witness the l et t er f or identifica-
tion, and then reading it t o him with the inquiry, 'What have
you t o say t o t hat ?' During the reading of hi s l et t er t he
witness will be collecting his thoughts and getting ready his
explanations i n anticipation of the question t hat is t o follow,
and the effect of the damaging l et t er will be lost.. . . The
cor r ect method of using such a l et t er is t o lead the witness
quietly into repeating the statements he has made in hi s
di rect testimony, and which his l et t er contradicts. Then read
it off t o him. The witness has fno explanation7. He has stated
-
the fact , t here is nothing to qu&y. "(41)
2 . The Reconnaissance
If the i nt errogat ee is cooperative at the outset or if
rapport is established during the opening phase and the source
becomes cooperative, the reconnaissance stage is needle s s ;
the i nt errogat or proceeds directly t o detailed questioning.
But if the i nt errogat ee i s withholding, a period of explora-
tion is necessary. Assumptions have normally been made
al ready as t o what he is withholding: that he is a fabri cat or,
o r an R E agent, or something el se he deems it important to
conceal. Or t he assumption may be that he had knowledge of
such activities car r i ed out by someone else. At any r at e, the
purpose of the reconnaissance is t o provide a q&ck testing of
the assumption and, mor e importantly, to probe the causes,
extent, and intensity of resi st ance.
During t he opening phase the i nt errogat or will have
chart ed the probable ar eas of resi st ance by noting those topics
which caused emotional or physical reactions, speech blocks,
o r other indicators. He now begins t o probe these ar eas .
Ever y experienced interrogator has noted that i f an i nt errogat ee
is withholding, his anxiety i ncreases a s the questioning
near s the mark. The safer the topic, the mor e voluble the
source. But as the questions make him increasingly un-
comfortaSle, "he interrogatee becomes l es s communicative
or perhaps even hostile. During the opening phase the
i nt errogat or has gone along with this protective mechanism.
Now, however, he keeps coming back t o each a r e a of sensi-
tivity until he has determined the location of each and the
intensity of the defenses. If resistance is slight, mer e
persi st ence may overcome it; and de,tailed questioning may
follow immediately. But if resistance is strong, a new topic
should be introduced, and detailed questioning reserved f or the
t hi rd stage.
Two dangers ar e especially likely to appear during the
reconnaissance. Up to this point the interrogator has not
continued a line of questioning when resi st ance was encountered.
Now, however, he does so, and rapport may be strained.
Some i nt errogat ees will take this change personally and tend to
personalize the conflict. The interrogator should r esi st this
tendency. If he succumbs t o it, and becomes engaged in a
battle of wits, he may not be able t o accomplish the t ask at
hand, The second temptation to avoid i s the natural inclination
t o r e s or t premat urel y to ruses or coercive techniques i n or der
t o set t l e the mat t er then and there. The basi c purpose of the
reconnaissance is t o determine the kind and degree of pr es s ur e
that will be needed in the third stage. The i nt errogat or should
r es er ve hi s fire-power until he knows what he is up-against.
3. The Detailed Questioning
a.
If rapport is established and if the interrogatee
has nothing significant to hide, detailed questioning
present s only routine problems. The maj or routine
considerations ar e the following:
The interrogator must know exactly what he wants
to know. He should have on paper or fi rml y i n mind all
the questions to which he seeks answers. It usually
happens that the source has a relatively l arge body of
information that has little or no intelligence value and
only a s mal l collection of nuggets. He will naturally
. L
,-. ". ,
tend t o t al k about what he knows b e t , The i ~t e r r o g a t o r
should not show quick impatience, but neither should he
allow the resul t s t o get out of focus. The determinant
remai ns what we need, not what the interro' gatee can
most readily provide.
At t he -same time i t is necessary t o make every
effort t o keep the subject from learning through the
interrogation proces s precisely where our informational
gaps lie. This principle i s especially important if t he
i nt errogat ee i s following his normal life, going home
each evening and appearing only once o r twice a week f or
questioning, or if his bona fides remai ns i n doubt. Under
al most all circumstances, however, a cl ear revelation
of our i nt erest s and knowledge should be avoided. It
is usually a poor practice to-hand to even the most
cooperative interrogatee an orderly list of questions and
as k him t o write t he answers. h his st ri ct ure does not
apply t o t he writing of autobiographies or on informa-
tional mat t er s not a subject of controversy with t he source. )
Some t i me is normally spent on mat t er s of little o r no
intelligence i nt erest for purposes of concealment. The
i nt errogat or can abet the process by making occasional
notes -- o r pretending to do so -- on i t ems that s e e m
important t o the interrogatee but a r e not of intelligence
value. Fr o m this point of view an interrogation can be
deemed successful if a source who i s actually a hostile
agent can report t o the opposition only the general fields
of our i nt erest but cannot pinpoint specifics without
including misleading information .
It is sound practice t o wri t e up each interrogation
report on the day of questioning or , at l east , before the
next sessi on, so that defects can be promptly remedied
and gaps or contradictions noted in time.
S E ' /b/
-
It is al so a good expedient to have the i nt errogat ee
make notes of topics that should be covered, which occur
t o him while discussing the immediate mat t ers at i ssue.
The act of recording the st r ay i t em or thought on paper
fixes it i n the i nt errogat ee1s mind. Usually topics
popping up i n the course of an interrogation a r e forgotten
if not noted; they tend t o disrupt the interrogation plan
if covered by way of digression on the spot.
Debriefing questions should usually be, couched to
provoke a positive answer and should be specific. The
questioner should not accept a blanket negative without
probing. Fo r example, the question "Do you know any-
thing about Pl ant X?" is likelier to draw a negative
answer then "Do you have any fri ends who work at Plant
X? o r "Can you descri be its ext er i or ?
It is important t o determine whether the subj ect l s
knowledge of any topic was acquired at f i r s t hand, l earned
indirectly, o r r epr esent s merel y an assumption. If the
information was obtained indirectly, t he identities of
sub-sources and related information about the channel a r e
needed. If st at ement s r e s t on assumptions, the f act s
upon which the conclusions a r e based a r e necessary to
evaluation.
As detailed que stioning proceeds, additional
biographic data will be revealed. Such i t ems should be
ent ered into the record, but it is normal l y referable
not t o diverge f r om an impersonal topic i n or der t o
follow a biographic lead. Such leads can be taken up
l at er unless they raise new doubts about bona fides.
As detailed interrogation continues , and c specially
at the half-way mar k, the i nt errogat or' s desi re t o complete
the t as k may cause him to be increasingly business-like
or even brusque. He may tend to cur t ai l or drop t he
usual i nqui ri es about the subject ' s well-being wi t h which
he opened ear l i er sessi ons. He may f eel like dealing mor e
and mor e abruptly with reminiscences or digressions.
His i nt erest has shifted f r o m the interrogatee himself,
who just a while ago was an interesting person, to the
at sk or' getting a t what he knows. But if rapport has been
establbhed, the interrogatee wi l l be quick to sense and
r esent t h b change of attitude. This point is particularly
important tf the interrogatee is a defector faced with
bewilder'hg changes and in a highly emotional state.
Any interrogatee has his ups and downs, times when he is
t i r ed or half-ill, times when his p ~r s o n a l problems have
l eft his nerves frayed. The peculiar intimacy of the
interrogation situation and the very fact that the interro-
gator has deliberately fostered rapport will dt e n lead
the subject to talk about his doubts, fears, and other
personal reactions. The interrogator should neither cut
off thb flow abruptly nor show impatience unless it takes
up an inordinate amount of time or unless it seems likely
that all the talklag about personal mat t ers is being used
deliberately as a smoke screen to keep the interrogator
f r om doing hi s job. I the interrogatee is believed
cooperative, then f r om the beginning to the end of the
process he should feel that the interrogator' s interest in
him has remained constant. Unless the interi.ogation is
soon over, the interrogatee' s attitude toward his ques-
tioner ts not likely to remain constant. He will feel more
and mor e drawn to the questioner or increasingly antago-
nistic. As a rule, the best way f or the interrogator to
keep the relationship on an even keel is to maintain the
s ame quiet, relaxed, and open-minded attitude from st ar t
to ffnbh.
Detailed interrogation ends only when (1) all useful
counterintelligence information has been obtained; (2)
diminishing ret urns and more pressing commitments
compel a cessation; or (3) the base, station,
admi t s f ul l or partLdl defeat. Term'bation for any reason
other than the f i r s t is only temporary. It is a profound
mistdke to write off a successfully resistant interrogatee
or one whose questioning was ended before his potential
was exhausted. KUBARK must keep track of such persons,
because people and circumstances change.
Until the
source dies or tells us everything that he knows that is ' .
pertinent to our purposes, his interrogation may. be
'k ..
interrupted, for years -- but it has not been
completed,
4. The Conclusion
The end of an interrogation 1s not the end of the interro-
gator' s responsibilities. Fr om the beginning of planning to
the end of .questioning it has been necessary to understand and
guard agai mt the various troubles that a vengeful ex-source
can cause. As was pointed out earlier, KUBARK1s lack of
executive authority abroad and its operational need for face-
l essness make it peculiarly vulnerable to attack in the courts
or the press. The best defense against such attacks is pre-
vention, through enlistment or enfor cement of compliance.
However r eal cooperation is achieved, its existence seems to
act as a deterrent to l at er hostility.
The initially resi st ant
subject may become cooperative because of a partial identi-
fication with the interrogator and his interesta, or the source
may make such an identification because of his cooperation.
In either event, he is unlikely to cause serious trouble in the
future. Real difficulties ar e more frequently created by
interrogatees who have succeeded in withholding.
The-followhg steps a r e normally a routine part of the
conclusion:
C.
Techniques of Non-Coercive Interrogation of Resistant
Sources
Zf source resi st ance is encountered during screening or during
the opening or reconnaissance phases of the interrogation, non-
coercive methods of sapping opposition and strengthening the tendency
to yield and t o cooperate may be applied. Although these methods
appear here in an approximate order of increasing pr essur e, i t
should not be i nferred that each i s t o be t ri ed until the key f i t s the
lock. On the cont rary, a large part of the skill and the success of
the experienced interrogator l i es in his ability to match method to
source. The use of unsuccessful techniques will of itself i ncr ease
the i nt errogat eel s will and ability to resi st .
This principle al so affects the decision to employ coerci ve
techniques and governs the choice of these methods. I i n the
opinion of the i nt errogat or a totally resi st ant source has the ski l l
and determination t o withstand any non-c oercive method o r combina-
tion of methods, it is bet t er to avoid them completely.
The effectiveness of most of the non-coercive techniques depends
upon t hei r unsettling effect. The interrogation situation is i n itself
disturbing t o most people encountering it for the f i r s t time. The ai m
i s t o enhance this effect , to disrupt radically the fami l i ar emotional
-and psychological associ at i ons of the subject. When this ai m is
achieved, resi st ance is seri ousl y impaired. There i s an interval --
which may be ext remel y brief -- of suspended animation, a kind of
psychological shock o r paral ysi s. It is caused by a t raumat i c or
. .
sub-traumatic experience which explodes, as it were, t he -,.or?d that
is f ami l i ar t o the subj ect as wel l as his image of himself within that
world. Experienced i nt er r ogat or s recognize this effect when i t
appear s and know t hat at this moment the source is f a r mor e open
t o suggestion, f a r l i kel i er t o comply, than he was just before he
experienced t he shock.
Another effect frequently produced by non-coercive (as well a s
coerci ve) methods i s the evocation within the i nt errogat ee of feelings
of guilt. Most persons have a r e a s of guilt in t hei r emotional
topographies, and an i nt errogat or can often chart these a r e a s just
by noting refusal s t o follow cert ai n l i nes of questioning. Whether the
sense of guilt has r e a l o r i magi nary causes does not affect the resul t
of intensification of guilt feelings. Making a person feel -re and
mor e guilty normal l y i ncr eas es both his anxiety and his urge t o
cooperate as a means of escape.
In bri ef, the techniques that follow should mat ch t he personality
of the individual i nt errogat ee, and t hei r effectiveness is intensified
by good timing and rapi d exploitation of the moment of shock.
(A
few of the following i t ems are drawn f r om Sheehan. ) (32)
1. Going Next Door
Od c a s i o n a ~ ~ t he information needed f r om a recal ci -
trant i nt errogat ee is obtainable f r om a willing sourcc. The
i nt errogat or should decide whether a confession is essent i al
t o his purpose or whet her information which may be held by
ot hers as wel l as the unwilling sourcc is really his goal. The
l abor of ext ract i ng the t r ut h f r om unwilling interrogatees should
be undertaken only if the same information is not mor e easily
obtainable el sewhere o r i f operational considerations requi re
self-incrimination.
2. Nobody Loves You
i nt errogat ee who i s withholding items of no grave
. .
consequence t o himself may sometimes be persuaded t o talk by.
' -...
the si mpl e t act i c of pointing out that t o date al l of the informa-
tion about hi s cas e has come f r om persons other than himself.
The i nt errogat or wants t o be fai r. He recognizes that some
of the denouncers may have been biased or malicious. In any
case, t her e is bound t o be some slanting of the facts unless the
i nt errogat ee r edr es s es the balance. The source owes it t o
himself t o be s ur e that the interrogator hears both si des of the
story. .
3. The All-Seeing Eye (or Confession i s Good f or the Soul)
The i nt errogat or who already knows part of the st ory
explains t o the source that the purpose of the questioning i s not
t o gain information; the interrogator knows everything al ready.
His r e a l purpose is t o t es t the sincerity (reliability, honor,
etc. ) of the source. The interrogator then asks a few questions
t o which he b o w s the answers. If the subject l i es, he is
informed f i r ml y and dispassionately t hat he has lied.
By
skilled manipulation of the known, the questioner can convince
a naive subject t hat all hi s secr et s a r e out and that furt her
resi st ance would be not only pointless but dangerous. I t hi s
technique does not work very quickly, it must be dropped
before t he i nt errogat ee l ear ns the t r ue limits of the questioner' s
knowledge. . .
4. The Informer
Detention makes a number of t ri cks possible. One of
t hese, planting an informant as the source' s cellmate, is so
well-known, . especi al l y in Communist countries, that i t s
usefulness is i mpai red if not destroyed. Less well known i s
the t r i ck of planting two informants in the cell. One of them,
A, t r i e s now and then t o pry a little information f r om the
source; B r emai ns quiet. At the proper time, and during A' s
absence, B war ns the source not to t el l A anything because B
suspect s him of being an informant planted by the authorities.
-
Suspicion against a single cellmate may' sometimes be
broken down if he shows the source a hidden microphone
that he has "found1' and suggests that they talk only in
whispers at the other end of the room.
5. News f r om Home
Allowing an interrogatee to receive carefully selected
l et t er s f r om home can contribute t o effects desired by the
i nt errogat or . Allowing the source to write l et t ers, especially
if he can be led t o believe that they will be smuggled out with-
out the knowledge of the authorities, may produce information
which i s difficult t o extract by di rect questioning.
6. The Witness
If ot hers have accused the interrogatee of spying f or a
hostile servi ce o r of other activity which he denies, t here i s
a temptation t o confront the recal ci t rant source with hi s
accuser o r accusers. But a quick confrontation has two
weaknesses: it is likely to intensify the stubbornness of
denials, and it spoils the chance to use mor e subtle mkthods.
One of these is to place the interrogatee in a n outer
office and escort past him, and into the inner office, an
accuser whom he knows personally or, in fact, any person --
even one who i s friendly to the source and uncooperative with
the i nt errogat ors -- who is believed to know something about
whatever the interrogatee is concealing. It i s 8al s o essent i al
that t he interrogatee know or suspect that the witness may be
in pos sessi on of the incriminating information. The witne s s
i s whisked past the interrogatee; the two a r e not allowed to
speak t o each other. A guard and a stenographer remai n in
the outer office with the interrogatee. After about an hour
the i nt errogat or who has been questioning the interrogatec i n
past sessi ons opens the door and asks the stenographer t o come
in, with steno pad and pencils. After a time she re-emerges
and types mat eri al f r om he r pad, making several carbons.
She pauses, points at the interrogatee, and asks the guard how
-
his name is spelled. She may also ,ask the i' nterrogatee
di rect l y f or the proper spelling of a st r eet , a prison, the
name of a Communist intelligence officer, or any ot her
' ,
fact or closely linked to the activity of which he i s , accused. . . .-. ..
She takes he r completed work into the inner office, comes
.
back out, and telephones a request t hat someone come up
t o act as l egal witness, Another man appears and ent ers the
i nner office, The person cast in the i nformer' s rol e may
have been l et out a back door at the beginning of t hese pro-
ceedings; or if cooperative, he may continue .his role. In
ei t her event, a couple of i nt errogat ors, with or without the
"infoxmer", now emerge from the i nner office. In cont rast
t o t hei r ear l i er demeanor, they a r c now relaxed and smiling.
The i nt errogat or i n charge says to t he guard, "O.K., Tom,
take hi m back. We don't need him any more. I ' Even if the
i nt errogat ee now i nsi st s on teUing hi s side of the st ory, he
is told t o rei ax, because the interrogator will get around to
hi m t omorrow o r the next day.
A sessi on with the witness may be recorded. If t he
witness denounces the interrogatee, t here is no problem.
If he does not, the interrogator makes an effort t o draw him
out about a hostile agent recently convicted i n court or other-
wi se known t o t he witness. During t he next interrogation
sessi on with t he source, a part of the taped denunciation can
be played back t o him if necessary. Or the wi t nesses'
r emar ks about the known spy, edited as necessary, can be
s o back that the interrogatec is persuaded that he is
the subject of the remarks.
Cooperative witnesses may be coached to exaggerate
s o that if a recordi ng i s played for t he interrogatee o r a
confrontation is arranged, the source -- f or example, a
suspected cour i er -- finds the witness overstating his
importance, The w,itnes s cl ai ms that the interrogatee is
only incidentally a courier, that actually he i s the head of
a n RXS kidnapping gang. The i nt errogat or pretends amazc-
ment and says into the recorder, "I thought he was only a
cour i er ; and i f. he had told us the t rut h, I planned t o l et him
go
But this is much more seri ous. On the basi s of charges
-
like these I' l l have to hand him over to the local police f or
t ri al . On hearing these remarks, the interrogatee may
confess the t rut h about the l esser guilt in order t o avoid
heavier punishment, If he continues t o withhold, the
interrogator may take his side by stating, ''You know,
I' m not at all convinced that so-and-so told a straight
story. I feel , personally, t hat he was exaggerating a
great deal. Wasn't he? What's the t rue st ory?"
7. Joi nt suspect s
If two or mor e interrogation sources a r e suspected
of joint complicity in act s directed against U. S. security,
they should be separated immediately. If time permits, it
may be a good i dea (depending upon the psychological assess-
ment of both) t o postpone interrogation f or about a week. Any
anxious inquiries f r om either can be met by a knowing grin
and some such repl y as, "We'll get t o you i n due time. There' s
no hur r y now, I ' If documents, witnesses, o r other sources
-
yield information about interrogatee A, such remarks a s "B
says it was i n Smolensk that you denounced so-and-so t o the
secr et policc, Is that right? Was it i n 1937? help to estab-
l i sh i n A' s mind t he i mpressi on that B is talking.
I the i nt errogat or is quite certain of the facts in the case
but cannot secure an admission from either A or B, a written
confession may be prepared and A' s signature may be repro-
duced on it. (It is helpful if B can recognize A's signature, but
not essential, ) The confession contains the salient fact s, but
they a r e distorted; the confession shows ,that A is attempting
to throw the ent i re responsibility upon B. Edited tape record-
ings which sound as though -4 had denounced B may also be
used f or the purpose, separately or in conjunction with the
written "confession, " If A is feeling a little ill or dispirited,
he can al so be led past a window o r otherwise shown t o B
without creating a chance f or conversation; B is likely to inter-
pret A' s hang-dog look a s evidence of confession and denuncia-
tion. (It is important that in all such gambits, A be the weaker
of the two, emotionally and psychologically, ) B then reads (or
hears) A' s "confession. I s If B persi st s in withholding, the
-
i nt errogat or should di smi ss him promptly, saying that A' s
signed confession is sufficient f or the purpose and that it does
not mat t er whether B corroborat es it or not. At the foilowing . ,
sessi on wi$h B, t he i nt errogat or selects some minor mat t er,
.x ..
not substantively damaging t o B but nevertheless exaggerated,
and says, "I'm not s ur e A was really f ai r to you here. Would
you c a r e t o t el l me your side of the st ory?" If B r i s es to t hi s
bait, t he i nt errogat or moves on t o ar eas of greater significance.
The outer-and-inner office routine may al so be employed.
A, the weaker, is brought into the inner office, and the door
is l eft slightly a j a r o r the t ransom open. B is l at er -brought
into t he out er office by a guard and placed where he can hear,
though not too cl earl y. The interrogator begins routine ques-
tioning of A, speaking r at her softly and iriducing A t o follow
sui t , Another person in the inner office, acting by prearrange-
ment, t hen quietly l eads A out through another door. Any . .
noi ses of depart ure are covered by the interrogator, who
r at t l es t he a s h t r a y o r moves a table o r l arge chair. As soon
as the second door is closed again and A is out of earshot, the
i nt errogat or r es umes his questioning. His voice grows louder
and angri er. He t e n s A t o speak up, that he can hardly hear
him. He grows abusive, reaches a climax, and then says,
"Well, t hat ' s bet t er. Why didn' t you say so in the f i r s t place ? ' I
The r e s t of the monologue is designed to give B the impression
t hat A has now st ar t ed t o t el l the truth, Suddenly the interroga-
t or pops his head through the doorway and i s angry on seeing
B and the guard. "You jerk!" he says t o the guard, "What a r e
you doing he r e ? ' I He ri des down the guard' s mumbled attempt
t o explain the mi st ake, shouting, "Get him out of her e ! 1'11 take
c a r e of you l at er ! "
When, in the judgment of the interrogator, B is fai rl y
well-convinced that A has broken down and told his story, the
i nt errogat or may el ect t o say to B, "Now that A has come clean
with us, I' d like t o l et him go. But I hate to release one of you
before the other; you ought to get out a t the same time. A seems
t o be pret t y angry with you -- feel s that you got him into this
jam, He might even go back t o your Soviet case officer and say
-
that you haven' t ret urned because you agreed t o st ay her e and
work f or us. Wouldn't it be better for you if I set you both
f r ee t oget her? Wouldn't it be better to t el l me your si de of
. .
the s t or y? I '
8. Ivan Is a Dope
It may be useful t o point out to a hostile agent t hat the
cover s t or y was ill-contrived, that the other servi ce botched
the job, that it is typical of the other servi ce t o ignore t he
welfare of its agents. The interrogator may personalize this
pitch by explaining t hat he has been i mpr essed by t he agent ' s
cotirage and intelligence, He sel l s the agent the i dea that the
i nt errogat or, not his old servi ce, represent s a t r ue fri end,
who understands him and will look' after hi s welfare.
9. Joint Int errogat ors
The commonest of the joint i nt errogat or techniques i s
the Mutt-and- Jeff routine: the brutal, angry, domineering
type cont rast ed with the friendly, quiet type. This routine
works best with women, teenagers, and timid men. If t he
i nt errogat or who has done the bulk of the questioning' up t o
this point has established a measure of rapport , he should play
the fri endl y role. If rapport is absent, and especially if
antagonism has developed, the principal i nt errogat or may take
the ot her part. The angry interrogator speaks loudly f r om the
beginning; and unless the interrogatee cl earl y indicates that
he is now ready t o t el l his story, the angry i nt errogat or shouts
down hi s answers and cuts hi m off. He thumps the table. The
quiet i nt errogat or should not watch the show unmoved but give
subtle indications that he too is somewhat afraid of his colleague.
The angry i nt errogat or accuses the subject of ot her offenses,
any offenses, especially those that a r e heinous or demeaning.
He makes it plain t hat he personally consi ders the i nt errogat ee
the vi l est person on earth. During the harangue the friendly,
quiet i nt errogat or breaks in to say, "Wait a minute, Ji m. Take
it easy. " The angry interrogator shouts back, "Shut up! I' m
handling this. I' ve broken crumb-bums before, and I' l l break
this one, wide open." He expresses hi s disgust by spitting on
-
the floor or holding hi s nose or any gr oss gesture. Finally,
red-faced and furi ous, he says, "I'm going to take a break,
have a couple of stiff drinks. But I'll be back at two -- and . ,
you, you bum,
you bet t er be ready t o talk. I ' When the door
s l ams behind him, the second interrogator tells the subject how
s or r y he is, how he hat es t o work with a man like that but has
no choice, how if maybe brut es like that would keep quiet and
give a man a f a i r chance to t el l his side of the st ory, et c. , etc.
An i nt errogat or working alone can al so use the Mutt-and-
Jeff technique. After a number of t ense and hostile sessi ons
the i nt errogat ee is ushered into a different or refurnished room
with comfortable furni t ure, cigarettes, etc. The i nt errogat or
invites him to sit down and explains his r egr et that the source' s
f or mer stubbornness forced the i nt errogat or t o use such t act i cs.
Now everything will be different. The interrogator talks man-to-
man. An Ameri can POW, debriefed on hi s interrogation by a
hostile servi ce t hat used this approach, has described the
resul t : "Well, I went i n and t here was a man, an officer he '
was , , , -- he asked me t o sit down and was very friendly, . . .
It was ver y t er r i f i c, I, well, I almost fel t like I had a fri end
sitting t here. I had t o stop every now and then and real i ze that
t hi s man wasn' t a fri end of mine.. . .I al so felt a s though I
couldn' t be rude t o him.. . . It was much mor e difficult f or me to - -
well, I al most f el t I had as much responsibility t o t al k t o him
and r eason and justification a s I have t o talk to you right now. "(18)
'Another joint technique cast s both i nt errogat ors in friendly
rol es. But whereas the interrogator i n charge is si ncere, the
3
second i nt errogat or' s manner and voice convey the i mpressi on
that he is mer el y pretending sympathy i n order to t r ap the
i nt errogat ee. He sl i ps i n a few t ri ck questions of the "When-
did-you-stop-beating-your-wife? " category. The interrogator
i n charge warns his colleague t o desist. When he repeat s the
t act i cs, the i nt errogat or in charge says, with a slight show of
anger, "We' re not her e t o t r ap people but to get at the truth.
I suggestl t hat you leave now. I' l l handle this. "
It i s usually unproductive to cast both i nt errogat ors in
hostile rol es .
If the recal ci t rant subject speaks mor e than one language,
it is bet t er t o question hi m in the tongue with which he is l eas t
fami l i ar as long as the purpose of interrogation is to obtain
a confession. After the interrogatee admits hostile intent o r .
activity, a switch t o the better-known language will facilitate
follow-up.
An abrupt switch of languages ,may t r i ck a resi st ant
source. If a n i nt errogat ee has withstood a barrage of questions
i n Ger man o r Korean, f or example, a sudden shift to "Who is
your case offi cer?" i n Russian may t ri gger the answer before
the source can st op himself.
An i nt errogat or quite at home i n the language being used
may nevert hel ess el ect t o use an i nt erpret er if the i nt errogat ee
does not h o w t he language t o be used between the i nt errogat or
and i nt er pr et er and al s o does not know that the i nt errogat or
knows his own tongue. The principal advantage her e i s that
hearing everything tvclice helps the interrogator t o note voice,
expression, gest ures, and other indicators mor e attentively.
This gambit is obviously unsuitable f or any f or m of rapid-fire
questioning, and i n any cas e it has the disadvantage of allowing
the subject t o pull himself together aft er each query. It should
be used only with an i nt erpret er who has been trained i n the
t e c hni que .
It is of basi c importance that the interrogator not using
an i nt er pr et er be adept i n the language selected f or use. Lf
he i s not, if sl i ps of gr ammar or a strong accent ma r hi s speech,
the r esi st ant source will usually feel fortified. Almost all
people have been conditioned to relate verbal skill to intelli-
gence, education, soci al status, etc. Er r or s o r mispronuncia-
tions al s o per mi t the interrogatee to misunderstand or feign
misunderstanding and thus gain time. He may al so r es or t t o
polysyllabic obfuscat'ions upon realizing the limitations of t he
i nt errogat or I s vocabulary.
Spinoza and Mortimer Snerd
If t here i s reason to suspect that a withholding source
-.
possesses useful coanterintelligence information but has not had
acces s t o the upper reaches of the target organization, the )
policy and command level, continued questioning ,about lofty
topics that the source knows nothing about may pave the way for
the extraction of information Zt lower levels, The i nt errogat ee
i s asked about XGB policy, f or example: the relation of the
ser vi ce t o i t s government, i t s liaison akrangements, etc., etc.
His complaints that he knows nothing of such mat t ers a r e met
by flat insistence that he does know, he would have to know, that
even t he most stupid men in his position know. Communist
i nt errogat ors w h used this tactic against American POW1s
coupled it with punishment f or "don't know" responses --
typically by forcing the prisoner to stand at attention until hc
gave some positive response. After the process had been con-
tinued long enough, the source was asked a question t o which
he did h o w the answer. Numbers of Americans have mentioned
' I . . . t he tremendous feeling of relief you get when he finally
as ks you something you can answer. ' I One said, "I know it
s eems strange now, but I was positively grateful to them when
they switched t o a topic I knew something about. "(3)
The Wolf i n Sheep's Clothing
It has been suggested that a successfully withholding
source might be tricked into compliance if led to believe that
he is dealing with the opposition. The success of the ruse depends
upon a successful imitation of the opposition. A case officer
previously unknown to the source and skilled in the appropriate
language talks with the source under such circumstances that
the l at t er is convinced that he i s dealing with the opposition.
The source i s debriefed on what he has told the Americans and
what he has not told them. The t ri ck is likelier to succeed if
the interrogatee has not been in confinement but a staged
"escape, ' I engineered by a stool-pigeon, might achieve the same
end. usuai l y the t r i ck i s so complicated and risky that its employ-
ment is not recornrnended.
64
-
-
Alice in Wonderland
The a i m of the Alice in Wonderland or confusion .
. ,
. -.
technique is t o confound the expect at i c~s 3rd cscditioned
...
reactions of the interrogatee. He is accustomed t o a world
that makes some sense, at l east t o him: a world of continuity
and logic, a predictable world. Hc clings t o t hi s world t o
reinforce his identity and powers of resistance.
The confusion technique is designed not only t o
obliterate the fami l i ar but t o replace it with the weird,
Although t hi s method can be employed by a single i nt erro-
gator, it is bet t er adapted to use by two or t hree. When the
subject ent er s the room, the f i r s t interrogator as ks a double-
talk question -- one which seems straightforward but is
essent i al l y nonsensical. Whether the interrogatee t r i e s t o
answer o r not, the second interrogator follows up (i nt errup-
ting any attempted response) with a wholly unrelated and equally
illogical query. Sometimes two or mor e questions a r e asked
simultaneously. Pitch, tone, and volume of the i nt errogat ors '
voices a r e unrelated to the i mport of the questions. No pat t ern
of questions and answers is permitted t o develop, nor do the
questions themselves rel at e logically t o each other. ' In t hi s
st range at mosphere the subject finds that the pat t ern of speech
and thought which he has learned to consider normal have been
repl aced by an eer i e meaninglessness . The i nt errogat ee may
start laughing o r refuse to take the situation seriously. But a s
the process continues, day aft er day if necessary, the subject
begins to t r y to make sense of the situation, which becomes
mentally intolerable. Now he is likely to make significant
admissions, or even t o pour out his story, just to stop t he
flow of babble which assails him. This technique may be
especially effective with the orderly, obstinate type.
Regression
There a r e a number of non-coercive techniques f or
inducing regressi on. All depend upon the i nt errogat or' s con-
t r ol of the environment and, a s always, a proper matching of
method to source. Some interrogatees can be r epr essed by
persi st ent manipulation of time, by retarding and advancing
clocks and servi ng meal s at odd times -- ten minutes or t en
hours aft er the last food was given. Day and night a r e jumbled. .
Interrogation sessi ons a r e similarly unpatterned the subject '. ',
may be brought back f or more questioning just a few minutes
aft er being di smi ssed f or the night. Half-hearted efforts t o
cooperate can be ignored, and cmver sel y he can be rewarded
f or non-cooperation. ( For example, a successfully resi st i ng
source- may become distraught X given some reward f or the
"valuable contribution" that he has made. ) The Alice in
Wonderland technique can reinforce the effect. Two or mor e
i nt errogat ors, questioning a s a t eam and in rel ays (and thoroughly
jumbling the timing of both methods) can ask questions which
make it impossible for the interrogatee t o give sensible, sig-
nificant answers. A subject who is cut off from the world he
knows seeks to recreat e it, in some measure, in the new and
st range environment. He may t r y t o keep t rack of time, to
live i n the f ami l i ar past, to cling t o old concepts of loyalty,
to est abl i sh -- with one or more interrogators - - i nt erpersonal
relations resembl i ng those that he has had ear l i er with other
people, and t o build other bridges back to the known. Thwart-
ing his at t empt s t o do so is likely t o drive him deeper and
deeper into himself, until he is no longer able to control hi s
responses i n adult fashion.
The placebo technique is also used t o induce regressi on.
The i nt errogat ee is given a placebo (a harml ess sugar pill).
Lat er he is told t hat he has imbibed a drug, a t rut h ser um,
which will make hi m want to talk and which will al so prevent
his lying. The subject' s desi re t o find an excuse f or the com-
pliance that represent s his sole avenue of escape f r om hi s
di st ressi ng predicament may make him want to believe that he
has been drugged and that no one could blame him f or telling
r his st ory now. Gottschelk observes, "Individuals under
i ncreased s t r e s s a r e more likely to respond to placebos. "(7)
Orne has discussed an extension of the placebo concept
in explaining what he t er ms the "magic room" technique. "An
example. . . would be . . . the prisoner who i s given a
hypnotic suggestion that his hand i s growing warm. However.
in this instance, the prisoner' s hand a c k l l y does become
warm, a problem easily resolved by the use of a concealed
- diathermy machine. Or it might be suggested.. .that.. . a
.'.
. -.
cigarette will taste bitter, Here again, he could be given a
1
cigarette prepared t o have a slight but noticeably bitter taste. "
In discus sing states of heightened suggestibility (which a r e not,
however, states of trance) Orne says, "Both hypnosis and some
of the drugs inducing hypnoidal states ar e popubr l y viewed as
situations where the individual i s no longer master of his own
fate and therefore not responsible for his actions. It seems
possible then that the hypnotic situation, as distinguished from
hypnosis itself, might be used t o relieve the individual of a
feeling of responsibility for his own actions and thus lead him
t o reveal information, "(7)
In other words, a psychologically immature source, o r
one who has been regressed, could adopt an implication or
suggestion that he bas been drugged, hypnotized, or otherwise
rendered incapable of resistance, even if he recognizes at some
level that the suggestion is untrue, because of his strong desi re
t o escape the st r ess of the situation by capitulating. These
techniques pr ovide the source with the rationalization that he
needs.
Whether r egr ession occurs spontaneously under detention
or interrogation, and whether it is induced by a coercive or
non-coercive technique, it should not be allowed to continue
past the point necessary to obtain compliance. Severe techniques
of regression a r e best employed in the presence of a psychia-
t ri st , t o insure full reversal later. As soon as he can, the
interrogator presents the subject with the way out, the face-
saving reason f or escaping f r om his painful dilemma by yielding.
Now the interrogator becomes fatherly. Whether the excuse is
that others have already confessed ( I d the other boys ar e doing
it1!), that the interrogatee has a chance to redeem himself
("you're really a good boy at heart"), o r that he can't help him-
self ("hey made you do i t l ' ) , the effective rationalization, the one
the source will jump at, is likely t o be elementary. It is an
adultls version of the kxcuses of childhood.
-
The Polygraph
The polygraph can be used f or purposes. ot her than the
eval uat i on of veraci t y. F o r example, it may be used as a n
adj unct in testing the range of languages spoken by an i nt er r o-
gat ee or his sophistication in intelligence mat t er s , f or rapi d
scr, eeni ng t o det ermi ne broad ar eas of knowledgeability, and as
an ai d i n the psychological assessment of sour ces. It s pr i mar y
function i n a counterintelligence i nt errogat i on, however, is t o
provi de a f ur t her means of t est i ng f or deception or- withholding.
A. r esi st ant source suspect ed of associ at i on with a host i l e
cl andest i ne organization should be t est ed polygraphidally at
l eas t once. Several examinations may be needed. As a gener al
r ul e, the polygraph should not be employed a s a measur e of
last r es or t . More rel i abl e readi ngs will be obtained if t he
i nst r ument i s used before the subject has been placed under
i nt ense pr es s ur e, whether such pr es s ur e is coerci ve or not.
Sufficient information f or t he purpose is normal l y avai l abl e
af t er screeni ng and one o r two i nt errogat i on sessi ons.
Although t he polygraph has been a valuable ai d, no
i nt er r ogat or should f eel t hat i t can c a r r y hi s respo,r&ibilitv f or
hi m. - IJJ kd5
-5
The best r esul t s a r e obtained when the CI i nt er r ogat or
and t he polygraph operat or work cl osel y t oget her i n laying the
groundwork for t echni cal examination. The oper at or needs al l
avai l abl e information about the personal i t y of the sour ce, as
wel l a s t he operat i onal background and r easons f or suspicion.
The CI i nt errogat or i n t ur n can cooperat e mor e effectively and
can f i t t he r esul t s of technical examination mor e accur at el y into
the totality of his findings if he has a basic comprehension of
the i nst rument and i t s workings.
The following discussion i s based upon R. C. Davis'
lfPhysiological Responses a s a Means of Evaluating Infor mation. "
(7) Although improvements appear to be in the offing, the
i nst rument in widespread use today measur es breathing,
systolic blood pressure, and galvanic skin response (GSR).
"One drawback in the use of respi rat i on as a n indicator, "
according t o Davis, "is i t s susceptibility to voluntary control. "
Moreover, if the source "knows that changes in breathing will
di st urb all physiologic variables under control of the autonomic
division of the nervous syst em, and possibly even some others,
a cert ai n amount of cooperation or a cert ai n degree of ignorance
is requi red for l i e detection by physiologic methods to work. " '
In general, ". . . breathing during deception is shallower and
slower than in t rut h telling. . . the inhibition of breathing
seems r at her charact eri st i c of anticipation of a stimulus. "
The measurement of systolic blood pr es s ur e provides a
.
reading on a phenomenon not usually subject t o voluntary control.
The pr es s ur e ". . . will typically r i s e by a few mi l l i met ers
of mer cur y i n response t o a question, whether it i s answer' ed
-
truthfully o r not. The evidence i s that the r i s e will gene rally
be gr eat er when (the subject) is lying. " However, discrimina--
tion between truth-telling and lying on the basi s of both
breathing and blood pr es s ur e ". . . i s poor ( al most nil) in the
earl y par t of the sitting and improves t o a high point l at er . 'I
The galvanic skin response is one of the most easily
t ri ggered reactions, but recovery aft er the react i on i s slow,
and ' I . . . i n a routine examination the next question i s likely
to be introduced before recovery i s complete. Par t l y because
of this f act t her e is an adapting trend in the GSR: with stimuli
repeated ever y few minutes the response gets smal l er , ot her
things being equal. "
Davis examines t hree t heori es regarding the polygraph.
-
The conditional response t heory holds that t h e subject r eact s
to questions that st ri ke sensitive ar eas , r egar dl ess of whether
he i s telling the t r ut h or not. Experimentation has not sub-
stantiated t hi s theory. The theory of ' conflict presumes that
a l ar ge physiologic disturbance occurs when the subject i s
caught between his habitual inclination to t el l the truth and his
:..
st rong desi r e not t o divulge a certain s et of facts. .Davis suggests' .. . .
t hat if t hi s concept i s valid, it holds only if the conflict is intense.
The threat-of -punishment theory maintains that a l arge physio-
logic response accompanies lying because the subject f ear s the
consequence of failing t o deceive. "In common language it
might be sai d that he fails to deceive the machine operator f or
the very reason that he f ear s he will fail. The ' fear' would be
the very reaction detected. " This third theory is more widely
held than the other two. Interrogators should note the inference
t hat a resi st ant source who does not f ear that detection of lying
will r esul t i n a punishment of which he is afraid would not,
according t o this theory, produce significant responses.
Graphology
The validity of graphological techniques f or the analysis
of the personalities of resi st ant interrogatees has not been .
established. There i s some evidence that graphology i s a
useful aid i n fhe ear l y detection of cancer and of cert ai n mental
i l l nesses. If the i nt errogat or or his unit decides to have a
source ' s handwriting analyzed, the sampl es should be submitted
t o Headquarters a s soon a s possible, because the analysis is
mor e useful in the preliminary assessment of the source than in
the l at er interrogation. Graphology does have the advantage of
being one of the very few techniques not requiring the assi st ance
or even the awareness of the interrogatee. As with any other aid.
the i nt errogat or is free t o determine for himself whether the
anal ysi s provides him with new and valid insights, confirms
other observations, i s not helpful,. or is misleading.
--- ----
J.A. 'I'HL COER GI VE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATION OF RESISTANT SOURCES
A. Rest ri ct i ons
The purpose of t hi s part of the handbook is to present
basi c information about coercive techniques available for use
. .
in the interrogation situation. It i s vital that this discussion . -
not be mi sconst rued a s constituting authorization for the use
of coerci on at field discretion. As was noted earl i er, t here
is no such blanket authorization.
5
For both ethical and pragmatic reasons no interrogator
ma y take upon h h s e l f the unilateral responsibility for using
coerci ve methods. Concealing from the interrogator' s super-
i or s an intent to r es or t to coercion, or i t s unapproved
employment, does not protect them. It places them, and
KUBARK, i n unconsidered jeopardy.
B. The Theory of Coercion
Coercive procedures a r e designed not only to exploit the
r esi st ant sour ce' s i nt ernal conflicts and induce him to wrestle
with himself but al so to bring a superior outside force to bear
upon the subject' s resistance. Non-coercive methods ar e not
likely to succeed if their selection and use is not predicated
upon an accurat e psychological assessment of the s ouxe.
In
contrast, the s ame coercive method may succeed against person6
who a r e very unlike each other, The changes of success r i s e
steeply, nevertheless, if the coercive technique i s matched to
the sour cel s personality. Individuals react differently even t o
such seemingly non-discriminatory stimuli as drugs. Moreover,
it i s a waste of tirne and energy to apply strong pr es s ur es on a
hit-or-miss basi s if a t ap on the psychological jugular will
produce compliance.
Al l coercive techniques a r e designed t o induce regressi on.
As HinkLe notes in "The Physiological State of the Interrogation
Subject a s i t Affects Brai n FunctionI1(7), the resul t of ext ernal
pr essur es of sufficient intensity i s the l oss of those defenses
mos t recently acquired by civilized man: I t , . , the capacity t o
car r y out the highest creative activities, t o meet new, chal-
lenging, and complex situations, to deal with trying i nt erpersonal
relations, and t o cope with repeated frust rat i ons, Relatively
smal l degrees of homeostatic derangement, fatigue, pain, sl eep
l oss, or anxiety may i mpai r t hese functions. " As a resul t , .
"most people who a r e exposed t o coercive procedures will talk
and usually reveal some information that they might not have
revealed otherwise. 'I
-
One subjective reaction often evoked by coercion is a
feeling of guilt. Meltzer observes, "In some lengthy i nt erro-
gations, the interrogator may, by virtue of his r ol e as the sole
supplier of satisfaction and punishment, assume the st at ur e and
importance of a parental figure in the pri soner' s feeling and
thinking. Although t here may be intense hat red f or the i nt erro-
gator, it is not unusual for warm feelings al so t o develop. This
ambivalence i s the basis f or guilt reactions, and if the i nt erro-
gator nourishes these feelings, the guilt may be st rong enough
to influence the pri soner' s behavior . . , . Guilt makes com-
pliance mor e likely. . . . I ' (7).
Far ber says that the response t o coercion typically
contains I f . . . at l east t hree important elements: debility,
dependency, a&d dread. Pr i soner s I t , . . have reduced' via-
bility, a r e helplessly dependent cn t hei r captors for the
sat i sfact ion of t hei r many basic needs, arid experience the
emotional and motivational reactions of intense fear and anx-
iety. . . . Among the / l me r i c a q POWt. pressured by the
. ,
Chinese Communists, txe DDD syndrome i n i t s full-blown f or m
\
constituted a st at e of discomfort that was well-nigh intolerable. I '
(11).
If the debility-dependency-dread state i s unduly prolonged,
however, the ar r es t ee may sink into a defensive apathy f r om
which it i s hard t o arouse him,
Psychologists and others who wri t e about physical or
psychological dur ess frequently object that under sufficient
pr es s ur e subjects usually yield but that t hei r ability t o recal l
and cormnunicate information accurately is a s impaired as the
will to r esi st . This pragmatic objection has somewhat the s ame
validity f or a counterintelligence interrogation as for any other,
But t her e is one significant difference. Confession i s a neces-
s a r y prelude to the GI interrogation of a hitherto unresponsive
or concealing source, And the use of coercive techniques will
r ar el y o r never confuse an interrogatee s o completely that he
does not know whether his own confession i s t rue or false. He
does not need full mas t er y of all his powers of resi st ance and
di s c r hi na t i on t o know whether he is a spy o r not. Only sub-
jects who have reached a point vh e r e they a r e under delusions
a r e likely to make f al se confessions that they believe. Once a
t r ue confession i s obtained, the cl assi c cautions apply, The
pr es s ur es a r e lifted, at l eas t enough s o that the subject can
provide counterintelligence information a s accurately a s pos si-
ble. In fact, the relief granted the subject at this time fi t s
neatly into the interrogation plan. He is told that the changed
treafrnent i s a reward f or truthfulness and an evidence that
fri endl y handling will continue a s long a s he cooperates.
The profound mor a l objection to applying duress past the
point of i r r ever si bl e psychological damage has been stated.
Judging the validity of other ethical arguments about coercion
exceeds the scope of t hi s paper. What is fully cl ear, however,
is t hat cont rol l ed coerci ve manipulation of an i nt err ogatee may
-
i mpai r his ability to make fine distinctions but will not al t er his
ability to answer correct l y such gross questions a s "Are you a
Soviet agent ? What i s your assignment now? Who i s your present
cas e officer ?'I
-
When an interrogator senses that the subject's resistance
i s wavering, that his desire t o yield i s growing stronger than
his wish to continue his resistance, the time has come t o provide
him with the ~ CCE~ $ S? ~ CI r2.tFonalization: a hce- saving reason or ''\ ..,
excuse f o r compliance, Novice interrogators may be tempted t o
seize upon the initial yielding triumphantly and to personalize the
victory. Such a temptation must be rejected iminediately, An
interrogation is not a game played by two people, one to become
the winner and the other the Loser. It is simply a method of ob-
taining correct and useful information, Theref ore the interr o-
gator should intensify the subject's desire to cease struggling by
showing him how he can do s o without seeming t o abandon prin-
ciple, self-protection, or other initial causes of resistance.
If,
instead of pr oviding the right rationalization at the right time, the
interrogator seizes gloatingly upon the subject's wavering, oppo-
sition will stiffen again,
The following a r e the principal coercive techniques of in-
t er r ogation: ar r est , detention, deprivation of sensory stimuli
through solitary confinement or similar methods, threats and
fear, debility, pain, heightened suggestibility and hypnosis, nar-
cosis, and induced regression. This section also- discusses the
detection of malingering by interrogatees and the provision of
appropriate rationalizations f or capitulating and cooperating,
C, Arrest
The manner and timing of ar r est can contribute substantially
t o the *err ogator 1s purposes, "What we aim to do i s t o ensure
that the manner of ar r es t achieves, if possible, surprise, and
the maximum amount of mental discomfort in order to catch . the .
suspect off balance and t o deprive him of the initiative. One
-
should therefore ar r es t him at a moment when he least expects
it and when his mental and physical resistance is at its lowest,
The ideal time at which t o ar r est a person is in the early hours
of the morning because surprise i s achieved then, and because
a person' s resistance physiologically a s well as psychologically
is at i t s lowest,. , , If a person cannot be arrested in the
early hours,, . , then the next best time i s in the evening.. . .
D. Detention
If, through the cooperation of a liaison service h r by uni-
lateral &sil arrangements have been made for the confinement
of a resistant source, the circumstances of detention ar e a r -
ranged to enhance within the subject his feelings of being cut
off from the laown and the reassuripg, and of being plunged into
the strange. Usually his own clothes ar e immediately taken
away, because famil'rar clothing reinforces identity and thus the
capacity for resistance. (Prisons give close hair cuts and issue
prison garb for the same reason. ) If the interrogatee is. especial-
ly proud or neat, it may be useful to give him an outfit ihat is
one or two sizes too large and to fail to provide a belt, so that he
must hold his pants up.
1
The point is that man's sense of identity depends upon a
conrinuity in his surroundings, habits,. appearance, actions,
relations with others, e tc. Detention permits the interrogator
to cut through these links and throw the interrogatee back upon
his own unaided internal resources.
Little is gained Lf confinement merely replaces one routine
with another. Prisoners who lead monotonously unvaried lives
". . . cease to' care about their utterances, dress, and cleanli-
ness. They become dulled, apathetic, and depressed." (7) And
apathy can be a very effective defense against interrogation.
Control of the soukce's environment permits the interrogator to
determine his diet, sleep pattern, and other fundamentals.
Manipulating these into irregularities, so that the subject become s :..
disorientated, is very likely to create feelings - of fear and help-
.....
l essness . Hinkle points out, "People who enter prison with
attitudes of foreboding, apprehension, and he!.plessnes s generally
do l es s well than those who enter with assurance &d a conviction
that they can deal with anything that they may encounter . . . .
Some people who a r e afraid of losing sleep, or who do not wish to
l ose sleep, soon succumb to sleep 10s s . ; . . " (7)
In short, the prisoner should not be provided a routine to
which he can adapt and from which he can draw some comfort--
or at l east a sense of his own identity. Everyone has read of
pri soners who were reluctant to leave their cells after prolonged
incarceration. Little is known about the duration of confinement
calculated to make a subject shift from anxiety, coupled with a
desi r e for sensory stimuli and human companionship, to a passive,
apathetic acceptance of isolation and an ultimate pleasure in this
negative state. Undoubtedly the rate of change is determined
al most entirely by the psychological characteristics of the indi-
vidual, In any event, it is advisable to keep the subjekt upset by
constant disruptions of patterns.
For this reason, it is useful to determine whether the in-
terrogattee has been jailed before, how often, under what circum-
. stances, for how long, and whether he was subjected to ear l i er
interrogation. Familiarity with confinement and even with
isolation reduces the effect.
E . Deprivation of Sensory Stimuli
The chief effect of ar r es t and detention, and particularly of
i
solitary confinement, is to deprive the subject of many or most of
the sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and tactile sensations to which
he has grown accustomed. John C. Lilly examined eighteen auto-
biographical accounts written by polar explorers and solitary sea-
\
f ar er s. He found ' I . . , that isolation per s e acts on most persona
as a powerful s t r es s . . . . In all cases of survivors of isolation
at sea or in the polar night, it was the f i r s t exposure which caused
the gr eat est f e a r s and hence the great est danger of giving way
to sympt oms; previous experience i s a powerful aid in going
ahead, despite the symptoms. "The symptoms most commonly .
produced by isolation a r e superstition, intense love of any other
living thing, perceiving inanimate objects as alive, hallucinations,
and delus ions. (26)
The apparent r eason for these effects is that a person cut
off f r om ext ernal st i mul i t urns hi s awareness inward, upon him-
self, and then proj ect s the contents of his own unconscious
outwards, so that he endows hi s facel ess environment with his
own at t ri but es, f ear s , and forgotten memories. Lilly notes, "It
is obvious that inner fact ors in the mind tend to be projected
outward, that s ome of the mind' s activity which is usually reality-
bound now becomes f r e e to turn t o phantasy and ultimately to
hallucination and delus ion. I '
A number of experi ment s conducted a t McGill University,
the National Institute of Mental Health, and other si t es have at -
tempted to come as cl ose as possible to the elimination of sensory
s timuli, or to maski ng remaining stimuli, chiefly sounds, by a
st ronger but wholly monotonous overlay. The resul t s of ' these
experiments have l i t t l e applicability to interrogation because the
ci rcumst ances a r e di ssi mi l ar. Some of the findings point toward
hy-potheses that seem- relevant to interrogation, but conditions
like those of detention f or purposes of counterintelligence interro-
gation have not been duplicated f or experimentation.
At the National Institute of Mental Health two subjects were
I t . . . suspended with the body and all but the top of the head
i mmer s ed in a tank containing slowly flowing water a t 34.5' C
(94.5' F). . . . Both subjects wore black-out masks, which en-
cl osed the whole head but allowed breathing and nothing else. The
sound l evel was ext remel y low; the subject heard only his own
breathing and s ome fai nt sounds of water f r om the piping. Neither
subject stayed & the tank longer than t hree hours. Both passed
quickly f r om normal l y di rect ed thinking through a tension resulting
-
f r om unsatisfied hunger f or sensory stimuli and concentration upon
the few available sensat i ons to private reveri es and fantasies and
eventually to visual i magery somewhat resembling hallucinations.
-
"In our experiments, we notice that after i mmersi on the day
apparently i s st art ed over, i. e. , the subject feels a s if he
has r i sen f r om bed afresh; this effect persi st s, and the
. .
subject finds he i s out of step with the clock for the r e s t of
'\ ..
the day. "
Drs. Wexler , Mendelson, Leiderman, and Solomon
conducted a somewhat similar experiment on seventeen paid
volunteers. These subjects were I t . . .placed i n a tank-type
respi rat or with a specially built mat t ress. . . . The vents
of the respi rat or were left open, so that the subject breathed
for himself. His ar ms and legs were enclosed i n comfortable
but rigid cylinders to inhibit movement and tactile contact.
The subject l ay on his back and was unable to see any part
of hi s body. The motor of the respi rat or was run constantly,
'
producing a dull, repetitive auditory stimulus. The room
admitted no natural light, and artificial light was mi ni mal
and constant. I ' (42) Although the established time limit
was 36 hours and though al l physical needs were taken car e
of, only 6 of the 17 completed the stint.
The other eleven
soon asked for release. Four of these terminated the
experiment because of anxiety and panic; seven did so because
of physical discomfort. The . results confirmed ear l i er findings
that (1) the deprivation of sensory stimuli induces s t r es s ;
(2) the s t r es s becomes unbearable for most subjects; (3)
the subject has a growing need f or physical and social stimuli;
and (4) some subjects progressively lose touch with real i t y,
focus inwardly, and produce delusions, hallucinations, and
other pathological effects.
In summarizing some scientific reporting on sensory
and perceptual deprivation, Kubzansky offers the following
observations :
f
"Three studies suggest that the mor e well-adjusted
or ' normal' the subject i s, the mor e he i s affected by
deprivation of sensory stimuli. Neurotic and psychotic
\
subjects ar e either comparatively unaffected or show decr eases
in anxiety, hallucinations, etc. I ' (7)
-
These findings suggest - but by no means prove - the
following theorie s about solitary confinement and isolation:
' .
.
I. The mor e complete?y the place of confinement
-
el i mi nat es sensory stimuli, the more rapidly and deeply will
the i nt errogat ee be affected. Results produced only after weeks
or months of imprisonment in an ordinary cell can be duplicated
i n hour s or days i n a cell which has no light (or weak art i fi ci al
light which never vari es), which is sound-procfed, i n which
odors a r e eliminated, etc. An environment still mor e subject
t o control, such a s water-tank or iron lung, i s even mor e
effective .
2. An earl y effect of such an environment is
anxiety. How soon i t appears and how strong i t i s depends
upon t he psychological charact eri st i cs of the individual.
3. The i nt errogat or can benefit from the subject' s
anxiety. As the i nt errogat or becomes linked in the subject' s
mind with the r ewar d of lessened anxiety, human contact, and
meaningful activity, and thus with providing relief for gr,owing
discomfort, the questioner a s sumes a benevolent role.
(7)
4. The deprivation of stimuli induces regressi on
by depriving the -subject' s mind of contact with an outer world
and t hus forcing it i n upon itself. At the same t i me, the
calculated provision of stimuli during interrogation tends t o
make the =egr essed subject view the interrogator a s a fat her-
figure. The resul t , normally, i s a strengthening of the
subject' s tendencies toward compliance.
F. Threat s and Fe a r
The t hr eat of coercion usually weakens or dest roys
resi st ance mor e effectively than coercion itself. The t hreat
to inflict pain, for example, can trigger f ear s mor e damaging
than t he immediate sensation of pain. In fact, most people
under e stimate t hei r capacity to withstand pain. The same
principle holds for other fears: sustained long enough, a
strong fear of anything vague or unknown induces regressi on,
whereas the materialization of the fear, the infliction of some
f or m of punishment, is likely to come a s a relief. he subject
.
. ,
finds that he can hold out, and his resistances ar e strengthened.
' , ...
"3.n general, direct physical brutality creat es only resentment,
hostility, and further defiance. " (18)
The effectiveness of a threat depends not only on what
sor t of person the interrogatee i s and whether he believes
that his questioner can .and wi l l car r y the threat out. but also
on the interrogator' s reasons for threatening. If the ,interrogator
threatens. because he is angry, the subject frequently senses
the fear of failure underlying the anger and i s strengthened
i n his own resolve t o resi st . Threats delivered coldly a r e
mor e effective than those shouted in rage. It is especially
important that a t hreat not be uttered i n response t o the
interrogatee' s own expressions of hostility. These, i f ignored,
can induce feelings of guilt, whereas ret ort s in kind relieve
the subject' s feelings.
Another reason why t hreat s induce compliance not
evoked by the inflection of duress is that the threat grants
' the interrogatee t i me for compliance. It is not enough that a
resi st ant source should lx placed under the tension of fear;
he must also discern an acceptabie escape route. Biderman
observes, "Not only can the shame or guilt of defeat i n the
encounter with the interrogator be involved, but also the more
fundamental injunction t o protect one' s self-autonomy or
1 1 ' . . . A simple defense against t hreat s to the self from
the anticipation of being forced t o comply 'is, of course, t o
comply ' deliberately' or 'voluntarily'. . . . To the extent that
the foregoing interpretation holds, the more intensely motivated
the f i t e r r oga t e g is to resi st , the more intense i s the
f
pressure toward earl y compliance from such anxieties, for
the greater i s the t hreat to self-esteem which i s involved
in contemplating t he possibility of being 'forced to' comply
. . . . " (6) In brief, the threat is like al l other coercive
x
techniques in being most effective when so used as to foster
regressi on and when joined with a suggested way out of the
dilemma, a rationalization acceptable t o the interrogatee.
The t hreat of death has often been 'found t o be worse
than useless. It "has the highest position in law as a
-
defense, but in many 5i i t e~~ogat i on situations it i s a highly
ineffective threat. Many prisoners, in fact, have refused
t o yield i n the face of such threats who have subsequently
been ' broken' by other procedures. " ( 3) The principal
reason i s that the ultimate threat i s likely to induce sheer
hopelessness if the interrogatee does not believe that i t
i s a t ri ck; he feel s that he is a s likely to be condemned
aft er compliance as before. The threat of death i s also
ineffective' when used against hard-headed types who
real i ze that silencing them forever would defeat the
i nt errogat or' s purpose. If the threat is recognized a s a
bluff, it wi l l not only fail but also pave the way t o failure
for l at er coercive r us es used by the interrogator.
No report of scientific investigation of the effect
of debility upon the interrogatee' s powers of resistance
has been discovered. For centuries interrogators have
employed various methods of inducing physical weakness:
prolonged constraint; prolonged exertion; ext remes of heat,
cold, or moi st ure; and deprivation or drast i c reduction of
food or sleep. Apparently the assumption i s that lowering
the source ' s physiological resistance wi l l lower his
psychological capacity for opposition. If this notion were
valid, however, it might reasonably be expected that those
subjects who a r e physically weakest at the beginning of
an interrogation would be the quickest to capitulate, a
concept not supported by experience. The available
evidence suggests that resistance i s sapped principally
by psychological rat her than physical pressures. The
t hreat of debility - for example, a brief deprivation of
food - may induce much more anxiety than prolonged
hunger, which wi l l resul t after a while in apathy and,
perhaps, eventual delusions or hallucinations. In bri ef,
i t appears probable that the techniques of inducing debility
become counter-productive at an earl y stage. The discomfort,
tension, and r est l ess search for an avenue of escape ar e
followed by withdrawal symptoms, a turning away from
external stimuli, and a sluggish unresponsiveness. . .
,
Another objection to the deliberate inducing of
debility i s that prolonged exertion, l oss of sleep, etc. ,
-:
themselves become patterns t o which the subject adjusts
through apathy. The interrogator should use his power
over the resistant subject' s physical environment t o
disrupt patterns of response, not t o creat e them. Meals
and sleep granted irregularly, in mor e than abundance
or l es s than adequacy, the shifts occuring on no discernible
time pattern, will normally disorient an interrogatee and
sap hi s will t o r esi st more effectively than a sustained
deprivation leading t o debility.
. -
H. Pain
Everyone is aware that people react very
differently to pain. The reason, apparently, is not a
physical difference in the intensity of the sensation itself.
Lawrence E. Hinkle observes, "The sensation of pain
seems t o be roughly equal in al l men, that is to say,
al l people have approximately the same threshold at which
they begin to feel pain, and when carefully graded stimuli
ar e applied to them, their estimates of severity a r e
approximately the same.. . . Yet.. . when men ar e ver y
highly motivated.. .they have been known t o car r y out
rat her complex tasks while enduring the most intense
pain. " He also states, "In general, it appears that
whatever may be the rol e of the constitutional endowment
i n determining the reaction to pain, it is a much l ess
important determinant than is the attitude of the man who
experiences the pain. (7)
The wide range of individual reactions to pain
may be partially explicable in t e r n of early conditioning.
The person whose fi rst encounters with pain were
frightening and intense may be more violently affected
by i t s later i dl i ct i on than one whose original experiences
were mild. Or the reverse may be t rue, and the man
whose childhood familiarized him with pain may dread
A T S E C
-
i t l ess, - and r eact l e s s , than one whose di st r ess i s heightened
by f ear of the unknown. The individual r emai ns the determinant.
It has been plausibly suggested that, whereas pain
inflicted on a person f r om outside himself may actually foc-ES
or intensify his will t o r esi st , his resi st ance i s likelier t o
be sapped by pain which he seems to inflict upon himself.
"In the simple t or t ur e situation the contest i s one between
the individual and his tormentor (. . . . and he can frequently
endure). When the individual i s told t o stand at attention
for long periods, an intervening factor i s introduced. The
immediate source of pain i s not the interrogator but the
victim himself. The motivational strength of the individual
i s likely t o exhaust i t sel f in t hi s internal encounter.. . . As
long a s the subject remai ns standing, he is attributing to
his captor the power t o do something worse t o him, but t here
i s actually no showdown of the ability of the interrogator
to do so.." (4)
ht er r ogat ee s who a r e withholding but who feel qualms
of guilt and a s ecr et desi r e t o yield a r e likely t o become
intractable if made t o endure pain. The reason i s that they
can then i nt erpret the pain a s punishment and hence a s
expiation. Ther e a r e al so persons who enjoy pain and i t s
anticipation and who will keep back illformation that they
might otherwise divulge if they a r e given reason to expect
that withholding will resul t i n the punishment that they
want. P e r sons of considerable mor al or intellectual
st at ure often find in pain inflicted by ot hers a confirmation
of the belief that t hey a r e i n the hands of i nferi ors, and
their resol ve not to submit i s strengthened.
Intense pain is quite likely to produce fal se confessions,
concocted a s a means of escaping f r om di st ress. A t i me-
consuming delay r es ul t s , while investigation i s conducted
and the admi ssi ons a r e proven untrue. During t hi s respi t e
the i nt errogat ee can pull himself together. He may even
use the t i me to think up new, mor e complex "admissions"
- that take st i l l longer t o disprove. KUBARK i s especially
vulnerable to such t act i cs because the interrogation i s
conducted for the sake of information and not for police purposes.
If a n i nt er r ogat ee i s caused to suffer pain r at her l at e
in t he i nt errogat i on pr oces s and aft er ot her t act i cs have . ,
f ai l ed, he i s al mos t cer t ai n to conclude t hat the i nt er r ogat or
.'. .
i s becoming desper at e. He may then deci de that if h,e can
j ust hold out agai nst t hi s fi nal assaul t , he will win the st ruggl e
and hi s f r eedom. And he i s l i kel y to be ri ght . ~ n t e r r o ~ a t e e s
who have withstood pain a r e mor e difficult to handle by ot her
met hods. The effect ha s been not to r e pr e s s the subject but
.
t o r e s t or e hi s confidence and mat uri t y.
I. . Heightened Suggestibility and Hypnosis
In r ecent year s a number of hypot heses about hypnosi s
have been advanced by psychol ogi st s and ot her s in the gui se of
pr oven pr i nci pl es. Among t hese a r e the f l at asser t i ons that a
per s on connot be hypnotized agai nst hi s will; that while
hypnotized he cannot be induced t o divulge information that he
want s urgent l y t o conceal; and that he will not undert ake, in
t r ance o r t hrough post-hypnotic suggestion, act i ons t o which
he would nor mal l y have ser i ous mor al or ethical objections.
If t hese and r el at ed contentions wer e proven valid, hypnosis
would have scant value f or the i nt errogat or.
But despi t e the f act that hypnosis has been an obj ect of
sci ent i fi c i nqui ry f or a ver y long t i me, none of t hese t heor i es
ha s yet been t est ed adequately. Each of t hem i s in conflict
wi t h some observat i ons of fact . In any event , an i nt errogat i on
handbook cannot and need not include a lengthy di scussi on of
hypnosi s. The cas e officer or i nt errogat or needs to know
enough about t he subj ect to understand the ci r cumst ances under
whi ch hypnosi s can be a useful tool, so t hat he can r equest
exper t as s i s t ance appropri at el y.
Operat i onal personnel , including i nt er r ogat or s, who
chance to have some l ay experi ence or ski l l in hypnot i sm
should not t hemsel ves use hypnotic techniques for i nt errogat i on
o r ot her operat i onal purposes. Ther e a r e two r easons for
t hi s posi t i on. The f i r s t i s that hypnoti.sm used as an operat i onal
tool by a pr act i t i oner who i s not a psychologist, psychi at r i st ,
o r M. D. can produce i r r ever si bl e psychological damage. The
-
lay practitioner does not h o w enough to use the technique
safely. . The second reason i s that an unsuccessful attempt
to hypnotize a subject f or purposes of interrogation, or a
successful attempt not adequately covered by post-hypnotic
amnesi a or other protection, can easily lead to l uri d and
.
embarrassi ng publicity or legal charges.
Hypnosis i s frequently called a st at e of heightened
suggestibility, but the phrase i s a description rat her than a
definition. Merton M. Gill andMar gar et Brenman st at e,
"The psychoanalytic theory of hypnosis cl earl y implies ,
where it daes not explicitly st at e, that hypnosis i s a f or m
of regressi on. " And they add, I t . . . inductionbf hypno sisJ
i s the process of bringing about a regressi on, while the
hypnotic state i s the established regressi on. (13) It i s
suggested that the interrogator will find t hi s definition the
mo s t useful. The problem of overcoming the resi st ance
of an uncooperative interrogatee i s essentially a probl em
of inducing regressi on to a level a t which the resi st ance
can no longer be sustained. Hypnosis i s one way of
regressi ng people.
Martin T. Orne has written at some length about
hypnosis and interrogation. Almost all of hi s conclusions
a r e tentatively negative. Concerning the rol e played by the
will or attitude of the interrogatee, Orne says, "Although
the cruci al experiment has not yet been done, t here i s
little o r no evidence to indicate that t rance can be induced
against a person' s wishes." He adds, I ! . . . the actual
occurrence of the t rance state i s related t o the wish of
the subject to ent er hypnosis." And he al so observes,
". . .whether a subject will or will not ent er t rance depends
upon hi s relationship with the hyponotist rat her than upon
the technical procedure of trance induction. These
views a r e probably representative of those of many
psychologists, but they are not definitive. As Orne
himself l at er points out, the interrogatee ". . . could be
given a hypnotic drug with appropriate verbal suggestions
to talk about a given topic. Eventually enough of the drug
would be given to cause a shoxt period of unconsciousness.
When the subject wakesn, the interrogator could then read
f r om hi s 'note;' of the hypnotic interview the information.
presumably told him. I ' (Orne had previously pointed cz.l.t, *.
that this technique requires that the interrogator possess
significant information about the subject without the subject' s
knowledge.) "It can readily be seen how' this.. . maneuver. . .
would facilitate the elicitation of information in subsequent
interviews. ' I (7) Techniques of inducing t rance in resi st ant
subjects through preliminary administration of so-called
silent drugs (drugs which the subject does not know he has
.taken) or through other non-routine methods of induction
a r e st i l l under investigation. Until more fact s a r e known,
the question of whether a r esi st er can be hypnotized involun-
tarily must go unanswered.
O.me al so holds that even if a r es i s t er can be
hypnotized, his resistance does not cease. He postulates
' I . . . that only in r ar e interrogation subjects would a
sufficiently deep trance be obtainable to even attempt to
induce the subject to discuss mat eri al which he is unwilling
to discuss In the wakLng state. The kind of Lnformation which
can be obtained in these r a r e instances is st i l l a n unanswered
question." He adds that it is doubtful that a subject in trance
could be made to reveal information which he wished to
safeguard. But here too Orne seems somewhat too cautious
or pe s s hi s t i c . Once an interrogatee is in a hypnotic trance,
his understanding of reality becomes subject to manipulation.
For example, a KUBARK interrogator could tell a suspect
double agent in trance that the KGB is conducting the questioning,
and thus invert the whole frame of reference. In other words,
Orne i s probably right in holding that most recal ci t rant subjects
will continue effective resistance as long as the f r ame of
reference is undisturbed. But once the subject is tricked into
believing that he is talking to friend rat her than foe, o r that
divulgLng the truth is the best way to ser ve hi s own purposes,
his resi st ance will be replaced by cooperation. The value
of hypnotic trance is not that i t permits the interrogator to
impose his will but rather that it can be used to convince the
interrogatee that there is no valid reason not to be forthcoming.
-
A t hi rd objection r ai sed by.Orne and ot hers i s that
mat eri al elicited during t r ance i s not reliable. Orne says,
". . . i t has been shown that the accuracy of such information.. .
would not be guaiant-eed since subjects in hypnosis a r e fully
capable of lying. ' I Again, the observation i s correct ; no known
manipulative method guarant ees veracity. But if hypnosis
i s employed not a s an immediate instrument for digging out
the truth but r at her a s a way of making the subject want to
align himself with hi s i nt errogat ors, the objection evaporates.
Hypnosis offers one advantage not inherent in other
i nt errogat i on techniques or aids: the post-hypnotic suggestion.
Under favorable ci rcumst ances it should be possible to
admi ni st er a silent drug to a resi st ant source, persuade
hi m a s the drug t akes effect that he i s slipping into a hypnotic
t rance, place hi m under act ual hypnosis a s consciousness i s
returning, shift hi s f r a me of reference so that hi s reasons
f or resi st ance become r eas ons for cooperating, interrogate
hi m, and conclude the sessi on by implanting the suggestion
that when he emer ges f r o m t rance he will not remember
anything about what ha s happened.
Thi s sketchy outline of possible uses of hypnosis 'in
the interrogation of r esi st ant sources has no higher goal
than to remi nd operational personnel that the technique
ma y provide the answer to a probl em not otherwise soluble.
To repeat: hypnosis i s distinctly not a do-it-yourself project.
Therefore the i nt errogat or, base, or center that i s considering
i t s use must anticipate t he timing sufficiently not only to secure
the obligatory headquart ers permi ssi on but also to allow for an
expert ' s t ravel t i me and briefing.
J. Narcosi s
Just a s the t hreat of pain may more effectively induce
compliance than i t s infliction, so an interrogatee' s mistaken
belief that he ha s been drugged may make hi m a more useful
interrogation subject than he would be under narcosis. Louis
A. Gottschalk ci t es a group of studies a s indicating "that 30 to 50
per cent of irrdividuals a r e placebo r eact or s, that i s , respond
with symptomatic relief to taking an inert substance. ". (7)
. .
In the inter rogation situation, moreover, the effectiveness
of a placebo may be enhanced because of i t s ability to placate
the conscience. The subject' s pri mary source of resi st ance
to confession o r divulgence may be pride, pat ri ot i sm,
personal loyalty to superi ors, or fear of retribution if he i s
ret urned to their hands. Under such circumstances hi s
nat ural desi re to escape f r om s t r es s by complying with the
i nt errogat or' s wishes may become decisive if he i s provided
. an acceptable rationalization for compliance. "I was drugged"
i s one o'f the best excuses.
. Drugs a r e no more the - answer t o the i nt errogat or' s
pr ayer than the polygraph, hypnosis, or other aids. Studies
and r epor t s "dealing with the validity of mat eri al extracted
f r o m reluctant informants. . . indicate that t here i s 10 drug
whi ch can force every informant to report all the information
he has. Not only may the inveterate criminal psychopath l i e
under the influence of drugs which have been t est ed, but the
relatively n0rkm.l and well-adjusted individual may a l s o
successfully disguise factual data." (3) Gottschalk rei nforces
the l at t er observation in mentioning an experiment involving
dr ugs which indicated that "the more normal , well-integrated
individuals could l i e better than the guilt-ridden, neurotic
subjects. (7)
Nevertheless, drugs can be effective in overcoming
resi st ance not dissolved by other techniques. As ha s already
been noted, the so-called silent drug (a pharmacologically
potent substance given to a person unaware of i t s administration)
can make possible the induction of hypnotic t rance in a
previously unwilling subject. Gottschalk says, "The judicious
I
choice of a drug with minimal side effects, i t s matching to
the subject' s personality, careful gauging of dosage, and a
sense of timing. . .[make] silent administration a hard-to-equal
, ally f or the hypnotist intent on producing self-fulfilling and
ine scapable suggestions. . . the drug effects should prove. . .
compelling to the subject since the perceived sensations originate
entirely within himself. ' I (7)
Part i cul arl y important i s the reference to matching the
drug to the personality of the interrogatee. The effect of most . L
drugs depends more upon the personality of the subject than
.'.
upon the physical charact eri st i cs of the drugs themselves. If
the approval of Headquarters has been obtained and ii a doctor
i s at hand for administration, one of the most important of
the i nt errogat or' s functions i s providing the doctor with a
full and accurat e description of the psychological make-up
of the i nt errogat ee, to facilitate the best possible choice of
a drug. ,
Per s ons burdened with feelings of shame or guilt a r e
likely to unburden t hemsel ves when drugged, especially if
t hese feelings have been reinforced by the interrogator.
And like the placebo, the drug provides an excellent
rationalization of helple ssne s s for the interrogatee who
w ants to yield but ha s hitherto been unable to violate hi s
own values or loyalties.
Like other coercive media, drugs may affect the content
of what an interrogatee divulges. Gottschalk notes that cert ai n
drugs "may give r i s e to psychotic manifestations such a s
hallucinations, illusions , delusions, or disorientation" , so
that "the verbal mat eri al obtained cannot always be considered
valid."
(7) For t hi s reason drugs (and the other aids discussed in
t hi s section) should not be used persistently to facilitate the
interrogative debriefing that follows capitulation. Their function
i s to cause capitulation, to aid in the shift f r om resistance to
cooperation. Once t hi s shift has been accomplished, coercive
techniques should be abandoned both for moral reasons and
because they a r e unnecessary and even counter-productive.
Thi s discussion does not include a l i st of drugs that
have been employed f or interrogation purposes or a
discussion of their propert i es because these ar e medical
considerations within the province of a doctor rather than
an interogator .
K. The Detection of Malingering
'. .
The det ect i on of malingering i s obviously not an
. .- ,
i nt errogat i on technique , coerci ve or ot herwi se. ~ u t t he
hi st or y of i nt errogat i on i s studded with t he st or i es of per s ons
who have at t empt ed, often successfully, t o evade t he
mounting pr e s s ur e s of i nt errogat i on by feigning physi cal
or ment al i l l ness. KUBARK i nt er r ogat or s may encount er
seemi ngl y si ck o r i r r at i onal i nt er r ogat ees a t t i mes and
pl aces which make it difficult or next-to-impossible t o
summon medi cal o r ot her professi onal assi st ance. Because
a f ew tiis may make i t possi bl e f or t he i nt er r ogat or t o
di st i ngui sh between the mal i nger er and t he per son who is
genuinely i l l , and because both i l l ness and mal i ngeri ng a r e
somet i mes produced by coerci ve i nt errogat i on, a br i ef di scussi on
of t he topic has been included her e.
Most per sons who fei gn a ment al or physi cal i l l ness
do not b o w enough about it to decei ve t he wel l -i nformed.
Mal col m L. Mel t zer s ays , "The detection of mal i ngeri ng
depends t o a gr eat extent on the si mul at or ' s f ai l ur e. to
underst and adequat el y t he char act er i st i cs of the r ol e he
i s feigning. . . . Often he pr es ent s sympt oms which a r e
exceedingly r a r e , existing rnainly i n t he fancy of t he l ayman.
One such sympt om i s the delusion of mi si dent i fi cat i on,
char act er i zed by the. . .belief that he i s some powerful
or hi st or i c personage. Thi s sympt om i s ver y unusual i n
t r ue psychosi s, but is used by a number of si mul at or s. In
schi zophreni a, the onset t ends to be gr adual , del usi ons
do not spri ng up full-blown over night; i n si mul at ed di s or der s ,
the onset i s usual l y f as t and del usi ons may be r eadi l y
avai l abl e. The feigned psychosi s often contains many
cont radi ct ory and i nconsi st ent sympt oms, r ar el y exi st i ng
t oget her. The -lingerer tends to go to ext r emes in hi s
pr ot r ayal of hi s sympt oms; he exagger at es, over dr amat i zes,
gr i maces , shout s, i s overl y bi zar r e, and cal l s at t ent i on
to hi msel f in ot her ways. . . .
"Another char act er i st i c of the mal i nger er i s t hat he
w i l l usually seek to evade or postpone examination. A study
of the behavior of lie-detector subjects, f or example, showed
t hat per sons l at er ' proven guilty1 showed cert ai n si mi l ari t i es
. .
of behavior. The guilty persons were reluctant to take the
. . .
t e s t , and they t ri ed in vari ous ways to p o s t p e ~e cr delz? it.
They often appeared highly anxious and somet i mes took a
host i l e attitude toward the t est and the examiner. Evasive
t act i cs somet i mes appeared, such as sighing, yawning, .
movi ng about, al l of which foil the examiner by obscuring
the recording. Before the examination, they fel t i t necessar y
to explain why t hei r responses might mislead the examiner
into thinking they wer e lying. Thus the procedure of subjecting
a suspect ed-mal i ngerer to a lie-detector t es t might evoke
behavior which would rei nforce the suspicion of fraud.
(7)
Meltzer al so not es that mal i ngerers who a r e not
professional. psychologists can usually be exposed through
Rorschach t est s.
An important el ement in malingering is the f r ame of
mi nd of the examiner. A person pretending madness
awakens i n a professional examiner not only suspicion but
al s o a desi r e to expose the fraud, whereas a well person
who pret ends to be concealing mental i l l ness and who
per mi t s only a mi nor symptom or two to peep through i s
muc h l i kel i er to cr eat e in the expert a des i r e to expose
t he hidden sickness.
~ e l t z e r obser ves that simulated mut i sm and amnesi a
can usually be distinguished f r om the t rue st at es by
narcoanal ysi s. The reason, however, i s t he r ever s e of
the. popular misconception. Under the influence of appropriate
dr ugs the mal i ngerer will per s i s t in not speaking or in not
r emember i ng, whereas the symptoms of the genuinely
afflicted will t emporari l y disappear. Another technique
i s to pret end to take the deception seriously, express
grave concern, and t el l the "patient" that the only remedy
f or hi s i l l ness is a s e r i e s of el ect ri c shock t reat ment s
- o r a front al lobotomy.
i nt errogat or acces s to the information he seeks, he i s not
. .
ordi nari l y concerned with the attitudes of the source. Under
some ci rcumst ances , however, this pragmatic indifference
can be short-sighted. If the interrogatee remai ns semi-
hostile or remorseful aft er a successful interrogation has
ended, l e s s time may be requi red to complete hi s conversion
(and conceivably t o creat e an enduring as s et ) than might be
needed to deal with hi s antagonism if he i s merel y squeezed
and forgotten.
X. INTERROGATOR' S CHECK LIST . .\ .
The quest i ons t hat follow a r e intended as r emi nder s f or the
i nt er r ogat or and hi s super i or s.
1. Have l ocal ( f eder al o r ot her) l aws affect i ng KUBARK' s
conduct of a uni l at er al o r joint i nt errogat i on been compi l ed and
l e a r ne d?
2. I f the i nt er r ogat ee is to be held, how long ma y he be
l egal l y det ai ned?
3 . Ar e i nt errogat i ons conducted by ot her ODYOKE depar t -
me nt s and agenci es with forei gn count eri nt el l i gence r esponsi bi l i t i es
bei ng coordi nat ed with KUBARK if subj ect t o t he provi si ons of
c h i e f / Ku BA~ K Di r ect i ve o r ChieffKUBARK Di r ect i ve ?
Has a planned KUBARK i nt errogat i on subj ect t o the same provi si ons
been appr opr i at el y coordi nat ed?
4. Have appl i cabl e KUBARK regul at i ons and di r ect i ves been
obser ved? Thes e include -, t he r e- 5
l a t e d Chi ef/ KUBARK Di rect i ves, .
per t i nent , and the provi si ons governi ng dur e s s which appear
in var i ous par agr aphs of t hi s handbook.
5. Is the prospe, ct i ve Lnterrogatee a PBPRI ME ci t i zen? If
so, have the added consi derat i ons l i s t ed on var i ous par agr aphs
been duly not ed?
1
6. Does the i nt er r ogat or s sel ect ed f o r t he t as k me e t the four
c r i t e r i a of (a) adequat e t rai ni ng a nd experi ence, (b) genu-he f ami l i -
a r i t y with t he l anguage to be used, ( c) knowledge of t he geographi cal /
3 cul t ur al a r e a concerned, and (d) psychol ogi cdl compr ehensi on of the
i nt er r ogat ee ?
- -
.A
. .
I .
4
. .
. .
- : -
. -
7. - Has the prospkctive interrogatee been screened? What
.. .
: r
a r e hi s maj or psychological charact eri st i cs? Does he belong to
one of the nine maj or categories listed in pp. 19-28? Which?
' L
.. -
8. Has all available and pertinent information about the
subj ect been assembl ed and studied?
p.'
*.
9. Is the source 1 -, or
P5
will questioning be completed elsewhere? If a t a base or station, ...
wi l l the interrogator, interrogatee, and facilities be available f or
J -
. .
the t i me est i mat ed a s necessary to the completion of the .process?
. .,
. .
Zf h e is to be sent to a center, has the approval of the center or of
.. .. . .
~ e a d ~ u a r t e r s been obtained?
. .
".: . . .
. . ...
10. Have all appropriate documents carri ed by the prospective
i nt errogat ee been subjected to technical anal ysi s?
I
U. Has a check of logical overt sources been conducted? Is
. ___.
-. ..
the interrogation necessary?
12. Have fi el d and headquarters t races been run on the potential
i nt errogat ee and persons closely associated with him by .emotional,
family, o r busi ness t i es?
. .
13. Has a preliminary assessment of bona fides been carri ed
out ? With what resul t s?
. .
14. If an admi ssi on of pri or association w.ith one or more
5 .
forei gn intelligence servi ces o r Communist parties or fronts has .. -.
:.--
been obtained, have full particulars. been acquired and reported?
15. Has LCFLUTTER been administered? As ear l y a s
pract i cabl e? More tha-n once? When?
16. Is it est i mat ed that the prospective interrogatee is likely
to prove cooperative or recal ci t rant ? If resi st ance is expected,
what is its anticipated source: fear, patriotism, personal considera-
tions, political co nvictions, stubbornness, other 3
S E
i
-
17, .What is the purpose of the ht errogat i on?
18. Has an interrogation plan been prepared?
20. Is an appropriate setting for interrogation available?
21. Weill the interrogation sessions be recorded? Is the
eqiiipment available? Installed?
22, Have arrangements been made .to feed, bed, and guard
the subject as necessary?
23, Does the interrogation plan cal l f or mor e than one in-
t er r ogat or ? If so, have roles been assigned and schedules pre-
pared?
24. Is the interrogational environment fully subject to the
i nt errogat or' s manipulation and control?
25. What disposition is plannedfor the interrogatee aft er
the questioning ends?
26. I s it possible, early in the questioning, to determine
the subject' s personal response to the interrogator or i nt errogat ors?
What i s t he interrogator' s reaction to the subject? Is t here an
emotional react i on strong enough to di st ort resul t s? If so, can the
i nt errogat or be replaced?
27. If the source is resistant, wi l l noncoercive or coercive
techniques be used? What is the reason f or the choice?
28. Has the subject been interrogated ear l i er ? Is he sophis-
ticated about interrogation techniques?
29. Does the irnpression made by the Lnterrogatee during the
opening-phase of the interrogation confirm or c o d i c t with the
preliminary assessment formed before interrogation started?
If there a r e significant differences, what ar e they and how do
they affect the plan f or the remainder of the questioning?
30. During the opening phase, have'the subject's voice,
eyes, mouth, gestures, silences, or other visible clues suggested
ar eas of sensitivity? If 80, on what topics?
31. Has rapport been established during the opening phase?
32. Has the opening phase been .followed by a reconnaissance?
What a r e the key ar eas of resistance? What tactics and how much
pressure will 5e required to overcome the resistance? Should the
estimated duration of 'mterrogation be revised? If so, a r e furt her
arrangements necessary for cofitinued detention, liaison support,
guarding, or other purposes ?
33. In the view of the interrogator, what is the emotional
reaction of the subject to the interrogator? Why?
34. Ar e interrogation reports being prepared aft er each
session, f r om notes or tapes ?
/
. -
35. What disposition of the interrogatee is to be made aft er
<. -
question'mg ends ? If the subject is suspected of being .a hostile
. .
agent and if interrogation has not produced confession, what
measures wi l l be taken to ensure that he is not left to operate as
before, unhindered and unchecked?
< ,.
- -
:. . . -.
.. ..
36. Ar e any promises made to the interrogatee unfulfilled
when questioning ends ? Is the subject vengeful? Likely to t ry to
. .
st ri ke back? How? ..;
-.
37. If one or mor e of the non-coercive techniques discussed
on pp. 52-81 have been selected for use, how do they match the
subject' s personality?
38. Ar e coercive techniques to be employed? If so, have
all field personnel in the interrogator' s direct chain of command
been-notified? Have they approved?
39.
Has pri or Headquarters permission been obtained?
41. As above, f or confinement. If the interrogatee i s to be
confined, can KUBARK control hi s environment fully? Can the
normal routines be disrupted for interrogation purposes?
42. -1s solitary confinement t o-be used? Why? Does the
place of confinement permit the practical elimination of sensory
stimuli?
43. Ar e t hreat s to be employed? As part of a plan? Has
the nature of the t hreat been matched to that of the i nt errogat ee?
44. If hypnosis or drugs a r e thougtt necessary, has Head-
quart ers been given enough advance notice ?
Has adequate allowance
been made f or t ravel time and other prelLmLnaries?
45. I s the interrogatee suspected of malingering? If the
interrogator is uncertain, a r e the servi ces of an expert available?
46. At the conclusion of the 'mterrogation, has a comprehensive
summary r epor t been prepared?
49. Was the interrogation a euccess? Why?
50. A failure? Why?
' ,
. .
'..
XL DESCRIPTIVE BIBLIOGRAPEU
, ' .
This bibliography i s selective; most of the books and ar t i cl es
consulted during the preparation of this study have not been included
her e. Those that have no r eal bearing on the counter'mtelligence in-
terrogation of r esi st ant sources have been left out. Also omitted
a r e some sour ces considered elementary, inferior, or unsound. I t
i s not cl ai med that what remai ns is comprehensive a s well as selective,
f or the number of published works having some relevance even to the
r est r i ct ed subject is over a thousand. But It is believed that all the
i t ems l i st ed her e me r i t reading by KUBARK persomiel concerned with
interrogatibn,
1. Anonymous ( 1 , Interrogation, undated.
This paper i s a one-hour l ect ure on the subject. I t is thoughtful, forth-
b
right, and based on extensive experience. It deals only with interrogation
-
following a r r e s t and detention. Because the scope is nevert hel ess broad,
the di scussi on is br i s k but necessarily l ess than profound.
2. Barioux, Max, "A Method for the Selection, Training, and
Evaluation of Int ervi ewers, Public Opinion Quarterly, Spring 1952,
Vol. 16, No. I. This ar t i cl e deals with the problems of interviewers
conducting public opinion polls. It i s of only slight value f or Lnterroga-
t ors, although it does suggest pitfalls produced by asking questions
that suggest t hei r own answers.
3. Biderman, Al ber t D. , A Study f or Development of Improved
Interrogation Techniques: Study SR 177-D (U), Secret , final report of
Contract A F 18 (600) 1797, Bureau of Social Science Research Lnc.,
Washington, D. C. , Mar ch 1959. ' Although this book (207 pages of text)
i s principally concerned with lessons derived f r om the interrogation
of Ameri can POW' S by Communist servi ces and with the problem of
resi st i ng interrogation, it al so deals with the interrogation of resi st ant
subjects. It has the added advantage of incorporating the findings and
views of a number of scholars and specialists in subjects closely
rel at ed to interrogation. As the frequency of citation indicates,
this book was one of the most useful works consulted; few KUBARK '*.
" .,
i nt errogat ors would fail. to profit from readlng it. It al so contains
a descriminating but undescribed bibliography of 343 items.
4. Biderman, Albert D. , "Communist Attempts to El i ci t Fal s e
Confession f r om Ai r Force Pri soners of War", Bulletin of the New York
Academy of Medicine, September 1957, Vol. 33. An excellent a.nalys is
of the psychological pressures applied by Chinese Communists to
Ameri can POW'S to extract "confessionsll f or propaganda purposes.
5. Biderman, Albert D. , "Communist Techniques of Coercive
Interrogationll, Ai r Intelligence, July 1955, Vol. 8, No. 7. This short
art i cl e does not discuss details. Its subject is closely rel at ed to that
of item 4 above; but the focus is on interrogation rat her than the eli-
citation of I'confes sions".
' 6. Biderman, Albert D. , "Social Psychological Needs and
' ~nvol unt ary' Behavior a s Illustrated by Compliance in I n t e r r ~ g a t i o n ~ ~ ,
Sociometry, June 1960, Vol. 23. This interesting art i cl e i s directly
relevant. I t provides a useful insight into the interaction between
interrogator and interrogatee. I t should be compared' with Milton W.
Horowitz' s "Psychology of Confessionll (see below).
7. B iderman, Albert D. and Herbert Z immer, The Manipulation
of Human Behavior, John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York and London,
1961. This book of 304 pages consists of an introduction by the editors
and seven chapt ers by the following specialists: Dr. Lawrence E.
Hinkle Jr. , "The Physiological State of the Interrogation Subject a s
it Affects Brai n FunctionI1; Dr. Philip E. Kubzansky, "The Effects
of Reduced Environmental Stimulation on Human Behavior: A ReviewH;
Dr. Louis A. Gottschalk, "The Use of Drugs in 1nterrogation1l; Dr.
1 R. C. Davis, llPhysiological Responses a s a Means of Evaluating In-
forrnation1I (this chapter deals with the polygraph); Dr. Martin T. Orne,
!!The Potential Uses of Hypnosis in Interrogation"; Drs. Robert R. Blake
f and Jane S. Mouton, "The Experimental Investigation of Int erpersonal
Influence"; and Dr. Malcolm L. Meltzer, I1Countermanipulation through
Malingering. 11 Despite the editors prelLminary announcement that the
book has "a particular frame of reference; the interrogation of a n un-
willing subject", the s t r es s is on the listed psychological specialties;
and interrogation get s comparitively short shr.ift.
Nevertheless,
the KUBARK i nt errogat or should read this book, especially the
chapters by Drs. Orne and Meltzer. He will find that the book is
. ,
by scientists f or sci ent i st s and that the contributions consistently . .-..
demonstrate too theoretical an understanding of interrogation per se.
He will al so find that practically no valid experimentation the resul t s
of which wer e unclassified and available to the authors has been con-
ducted under interrogation conditions. Conclusions a r e suggested.
al most invariably, on a basi s of extrapolation. But the book does
contain much useful information, a s frequent references in this
study show. The combined bibliographies contain a total of 771
items.
13. Gill, Merton, Inc. , and Margaret Brenman,
Hypnosis and R elated States: Psychoanalytic Studies in
Regression, international Universities Pr e s s Inc. , New Y ork,
1959. This book is a scholarly and comprehensive examination
of hypnosis. The approach is basically Freudian but the aut hors
a r e neithe; narrow nor doctrinaire. The book di scusses the
induction of hypnosis, the hypnotic st at e, theories of induction
and of the hypnotic condition, the concept of regression- as a
basi c element in hypnosis, relationships between hypnosis and
dmgs , sleep, fugue, etc. , and the use of hypnosis' in
psychotherapy. Interrogators may find the comparison
between hypnos is and llbrainwashLngll in chapter 9 mor e
rel evant than ot her parts. ~ h e ' b o o k i s recommended,
however, not because it contains any discussion of the
employment of hypnosis in interrogation (i t does not) but
- .
because i t provides the interrogator with sound information
about what hypnosis can. and cannot do.
14. Hinkle, Lawrence E. Jr. and Harold G, Wolff,
llCommunis t Interrogation and Indoctrination of Enemies
of the State1!, AMA Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry,
August 1956, Vol. 76, No. 2. This art i cl e summari zes
-
the physiological and psychological reactions of Ameri can
pri soners to Co~llmunist detention and interrogation. It
mer i t s reading but not study, chiefly because of the vast
differences between-~orrrmunist interrogati' on of Ameri can
POW' S and KUBARK interrogation of known or suspected
personnel of Communist servi ces or parties.
-
15. Horowitz, Milton W. , "Psychology of Confession. I '
Jour nal of Cr i mi nal Law, Criminology, and Pol i ce Science, Jul y-
August 1956, Vol. 47. The author lists t he following pr i nci pl es of
. ,
confession: (1) the subj ect f eel s accused; (2) he is confronted by
aut hori t y wielding power gr eat er than hi s own; (3) he beli' eves t hat
evi dence damaging t o hi m is available t o or possessed by t he aut hori t y.
(4) t he accused is cut off f r om friendly support: (5) sel f-host i l i t y i s
gener at ed; and (6) confession t o authority pr omi ses rel i ef. ~ l t h o u ~ h
t he ar t i cl e is essent i al l y a speculation r at her than a r epor t of veri fi ed
f act s, it mer i t s cl ose readi ng.
16. Inbau, Fr e d E. and John E. Reid, Li e Detection and
Cr i mi nal Investigation, Williams and Wilkins Co. , 1953. The
f i r s t pa r t of t hi s book consi st s of a di scussi on of t he ~ol ygr a ph. It
- . - -
wi l l be mor e useful t o t he KUBARK i nt errogat or than t he second, which
deal s wi t h t he el ement s of cr i mi nal i nt errogat i on.
17. KHOKHLOV, Nicolai, In the Name of Consci ence, David
,%Kay Co., New York, 1959. This ent r y is included chi efl y because
of t he ci t ed quotation. I t does provide, however, some i nt er est i ng
i nsi ght s i nt o t he affitudes of a n i nt errogat ee.
18. KUBARK, Communist Control Methods, Appendix 1:
"The Use of Scientific Design and Guidance Drugs and Hypnosis i n
Communi st Int errogat i on and Indbctrination Pr ocedur es. " Secr et , no
dat e. The appendix r epor t s a study of whether Communi st i nt er r oga-
tion met hods included such ai ds a s hypnosis and drugs. Although
experi ment at i on i n t hese a r e a s i s, of. course, conducted i n Communi st
count r i es, the study found no evidence t hat such methods a r e used i n
Communi st i nt errogat i ons - - o r that t hey would be necessar y.
19. KUBARK (XUSODA), Communist Control Techni ques,
. Secret , 2 Apr i l 1956.
Thi s study i s an anal ysi s of the met hods used
by Communi st State police in the a r r e s t , i nt errogat i on, and i ndoct ri na-
tion af per sons regarded a s enemi es of the st at e. Thi s paper , l i ke
ot her s which deal with Communist i nt errogat i on t echni ques, may be
useful t o any KUBARK i nt errogat or charged with questioning a f or me r
member of a n ' or bi t intelligence or securi t y ser vi ce but does not deal
with i nt errogat i on conducted without police powers.
S E " , A
I - 20. KUBm, Hostile Control and Int errogat i on Techniques.
Secr et , undated. This paper consi st s of 28 pages and two annexes.
It pr ovi des counsel t o KUBARK personnel on how to r es i s t i nt erroga-
t i on conduct ed by a hostile ser vi ce. Althclugh it icc?xlas sensible :..
advi ce on r esi st ance, i t does not present any new information about th;.%,
t heor i es o r pr act i ces of interrogation.
23. Laycock, Keith, "Handwriting Analysis as 'an Assess-
-
merit Aid, " Studies i n Intelligence, Surnmer 1959, Vol; 3, No. 3.
A
defense of graphology by an "educated amat eur . " Although the ar t i cl e i's
i nt er est i ng, it does not pr esent t est ed evidence t hat the anal ysi s of
a subj ect ' s handwriting would be a useful aid t o an i nt errogat or.
Recommended, nevert hel ess, f or i nt errogat ors unfami l i ar with the
subj ect . ?
24. Lefton, Robert Jay, "Chinese Communi st 'Thought
Reform. ' : Confession and Reeducation of West ern Civilians, "
Bul l et i n of the New York Academy of Medicine, Sept ember 1957,
Vol, 33. A sound ar t i cl e about Chicom brainwashing techniques. The
i nformat i on was compiled f r om first-hand i nt ervi ews with pr i soner s
who had been subj ect ed to the process. Recommended as background
readi ng.
25. Levenson, Bernard and Lee' Wiggins, A Guide f or
Intelligence Interviewing of Voluntary Forei gn Sources, Official
Use M y , Officer Education Research Laboratory, ARDC, Maxwell :,
Air For ce Base (Technical Memorandum OERL-TM-54-4. ) A good, - '.. .,
though generalized, t r eat i se on interviewing techniques. As the title
shows, the subject is different f r om that of the present study.
26. Lilly, John C., "Mental Effects of Reduction of Ordinary
Levels of Physi cal Stimuli on Intact Healthy Persons. Psychological
Research Report #5, Ameri can Psychi at ri c Association, 1956. After
presenting a short summar y of a few autobiographical accounts
wri t t en about relative isolation a t s ea (in s mal l Goats) or polar regions,
the author descri bes two experiments designed to mask or drast i cal l y
reduce mos t sensory stimulation. The effect was t o speed up the
r esul t s of t he more usual s or t of isolation (for example, sol i t ary
confinement), Delusions and hallucinations, preceded by ot her
symptoms, appeared af t er short periods. The author does not discuss
the possible relevance of his findings t o interrogation.
27, Meerlo, Joost A. M., The Rape of the Mind, World
P.ublishing Go., Cleveland, 1956, This book' s pr i mar y value f or the
i nt errogat or is that it will make him aware of a number of elements
i n the r esponses of a n i nt errogat ec which are not directly related to
the questions asked o r the interrogation setting but a r e instead the
product of (or a r e at least influenced by) all questioning that the subject -
has undergone ear l i er , especially as a child. For many i nt errogat ees
the i nt errogat or becomes, f or bet t er o r worse, the parent o r authority
symbol. Whether. the subject is submissive o r belligerent may be
det ermi ned i n part by his childhood relationships with his parent s.
Because t he same f or ces a r e at work i n the interrogator, the i nt erro-
gation m a y be chiefly a cover f or a deeper l ayer of exchange or
conflict between the two. Fo r the i nt errogat or a pri mary value of
this book (and of much rel at ed psychological and psychoanalytic
work) is t hat it may give him a deeper insight into himself.
28, Maloney', James Cl ark, "Psychic Self- Abandon and
%ortion of Confessions, " International Journal of Psychoanalysis,
Januar y/ Febr uar y 1955, Vol. 36. This shor t art i cl e rel at es the
psychological rel ease obtained through confession ( i , e., the sense of
well-being following s ur r ender a s a solution to an otherwise unsolvable
conflict) with rel i gi ous experience general l y and some t en Buddhistic
pr act i ces part i cul arl y. The i nt errogat or will find l i t t l e her e that i s .
not mor e helpfully di scussed i n ot her sour ces, including Gill and
Br enman' s Hypnosis and Related States. Marginal. . ,
29.
Oatis, William N. , "Why I Confes'sed, " - Li fe, 21 Sept ember
1953, Vol. 35. Of some margi nal value because i t cpmbi nes the
wr i t er ' s pr of essi on of innocence ("I a m not a spy and never was")
with a n account of how he was brought t o "confess" to espionage within
t hr ee days of his a r r e s t . Although Oatis was peri odi cal l y deprived
of s l eep (once f or 42 hour s) and forced to stand until wear y, the
Czechs obtained t he "confession" without t or t ur e o r st arvat i on and
without sophi st i cat ed techniques.
36. Rundquist, - E.A., -!!The Assessment of Graphology, I '
Studies i n Intelligence, Secret, Summer 1959, Vol. 3, No. 3.
The'
aut hor concl udes that sci ent i fi c testing of graphology is needed to
per mi t an objective assessment of t he cl ai ms made i n its behalf. Thi s
ar t i cl e shoul d be r ead i n conjunction with No. 23, above.
31. Schacht er , Stanley, The Psychology of Affiliation:
Exper i ment al Studies of the Sources of Gr egar i ousness, Stanford
Uni versi t y Pr e s s , Stanford, California, 1959. A r epor t of 133 pages,
chiefly concer ned with experi ment s and st at i st i cal anal yses performed
at t he Uni versi t y of Minnesota by Dr . ~ c h a c h t e r and col l eagues. The
pri nci pal findings concern relationships among anxiety, st rengt h of
affiliative t endenci es, and t he ordi nal position (i. e. , r ank in bi r t h
sequence among si bl i ngs). Some tentative conclusions of significance
f or i nt er r ogat or s a r e reached, the following among them:
a.
"One of the consequences of i sol at i on appear s t o be
a psychol ogi cal st at e which i n i t s ext r eme f or m r esembl es a
full-blown anxi et y at t ack. I ' (p. 12. )
b. Anxiety i ncr eases the des i r e t o be with ot her s who
s har e t he same fe.ar.
C. Per s ons who a r e f i r st - bor n or only chi l dren a r e
t ypi cal l y mor e nervous or afrai d than t hose bor n l at er .
Fi r s t -
bor ns and onl i es a r e al so "considerably l e s s willing or abl e to
wi t hst and pain than a r e late r-born chi l dren. I ' (p. 49. )
In bri ef, this book present s hypotheses of i nt erest to i nt errogat ors,
but much f ur t her r es ear ch i s needed to t est validity and applicability.
. ,
32. Sheehan, Robert, Police Interview and Interrogations and -:,
. '%
t he Preparat i on and Signing of Statements. A 23-page pamphlet,
unclassified and undated, that di scusse. ~ some techniques and t ri cks
that can be used in counterintelligence interrogation. The style i s
sprightly, but most of the mat eri al i s only slightly related t o KUBARK's
interrogation problems. Recommended a s background reading.
33, Singer, Margaret Thaler and Edgar H. Schein, "Projective
- - -
Test Responses of Pr i soner s of Wa r Following Repatriation. " Psychiatry,
1958, Vol. 21. Test s conducted on American ex-POW1s returned during
the Big and Little Switches in Korea showed differences in charact eri st i cs
between non-collaborators and corraborat ors. The l at t er showed more . -
typical and humanly responsive reactions to psychological testing than
the f or mer , who- tended t o be mor e apathetic and emotionally bar r en
or withdrawn, Active r es i s t er s , however, often showed a pattern of
react i on o r responsiveness like that of collaborators. Rorschach
- .. -:
t es t s provided clues, with a good statistical incidence of reliability,
f or differentation between collaborators and non-collaborators.
The
t es t s and r esul t s descri bed a r e worth noting in conjunction with the
screening procedures recommended i n this paper.
34. Sullivan, Har r y Stack, The Psychiatric Interview, W. W.
Norton and Co., New York, 1954.
Any interrogator reading this book
will be st r uck by paral l el s between the psychiatric interview and the
interrogation.
The book is al so valuable because the author, a
psychi at ri st of considerable repute, obviously had a deep understand-
ing of the nat ure of the inter-personal relationship and of resistance.
35. U.S. Army, Office of the Chief of Military History,
Russian Methods of Interrogating Captured Personnel in World War 11,
Secret, Washington, 1951. A comprehensive t reat i se on Russian
intelligence and police syst ems and on the history of Russian t reat -
ment of captives, mi l i t ary and civilian, during and following World
Wa r PI. The appendix contains some specific case summari es of
physical t ort ure by the s ecr et police. Only a smal l part of the book
- deals with i nt er rogation. Background reading.
36; U, S. Army, 7707 European Comrnand Intelligence Center,
-
Guide f or Intelligence Interrogators of ~a ' s t e r n Cases, Secret, April
1958. This specialized study is of some marginal value for KUBARK
i nt errogat ors dealing with Russians and other Slavs.
. .
'\ .
',
37. U. S. Army, The Army Intelligence School, For t Holabird,
Techniques of Interrogation, ~ns t r uct or s older I-6437/A, January
1956. This folder consists largely of an article, " ~ i t h o u t Tort ure, "
by a German ex-interrogator, Hans Joachim Scharff. Both the pre-
l i mi nary discuss ion and the Scharff art i cl e (fi rst published -in Argosy,
May 1950) a r e exclusively concerned with the. interrogation of POW Is.
Although Scharff claims .that the methods used by German Military
Intelligence against captured U. S. Ai r Force personnel ". . . were
al most i rresi st i bl e, the basic technique cons is ted of i mpress ing
upon the pri soner the false conviction that his information was al ready
known to the Germans in full detail. The success of this method de-
pends upon circumstances that a r e usually lacking in the peacetime
,
interrogation of a staff or agent member of a hostile intelligence
service. The ar t i cl e meri t s reading, nevertheless, because i t shows
vividly the advantages that result f r om good &-ing and organization.
38. U. S, Army, Counterintelligence Corps, For t Holabird,
Interrogations, Restricted, 5 September 1952. Basi c coverage of
mi l i t ary interrogation. Among the subjects di scussed' are the interro-
gation of witnesses, suspects, POW'S, and refugees, and the employment
of i nt erpret ers and of the polygraph. Although this text does not
concentrate upon the basic problems confronting KUBARK interrogators,
it will repay reading.
39. U. S. Amy , Counterintelligence Corps, For t Holabird,
Investigative Subjects Department, Interrogations, Restricted,
1 May 1950. This 70-page booklet on counterintelligence interroga-
tion is basic, succinct, practical, and sound. R e c o me n d e d f or close
I reading.
\
I .S
. .-
41. Wellman, Fr a nc i s L., The Ar t of Cr oss- Emmi nat i on,
Garden City Publishing Co. (now Doubleday), New York, ori gi nal l y .
?.
.I
. .
1903, 4th edition, 1948. Most of this book is but i ndi rect l y r el at ed to . .... ;. . ..
.-.
t he subj ect of t hi s study; it i s pr i mar i l y concerned with t ri ppi ng up
I -
2.
wi t nesses and i mpr essi ng j uri es . Chapt er VIII, "Fal l aci es of
Testimony, ' I is wort h readi ng, however, because some of i t s warni ngs
a r e applicable.
42. Wexler, Donald, Jack Mendelson, Her ber t Lei der man,
and Phi l i p Solomon, "Sensory ~ e ~ r i v a t i o n , A. M. A, Archi ves of
Neurology and Psychi at r y, 1958, 79, pp. 225;233. Thi s ar t i cl e
r epor t s a n exper i ment desi gned t o t es t the r esul t s of eliminating most
sensor y st i mul i and maski ng ot hers. Pai d vol unt eers spent per i ods f r om
1 hour and 38 mi nut es t o 36 hour s i n a t ank-respi rat or. The r es ul t s
included inability t o concent rat e effectively, daydreami ng and
fant asy, illusions., del usi ons, and hallucinations. The sui t abi l i t y of
t hi s procedure as a means of speeding up the effect s of sol i t ar y con-
fi nement upon r ecal ci t r ant subj ect s has not been consi dered.
OTHER BIBLIOGRAPHIES
The following bi bl i ographi es on i nt errogat i on wer e noted
dbr i ng t he pr epar at i on of t hi s study.
1. Brai nwashi ng, A Guide to the Li t er at ur e, pr epar ed
by t he Society f or t he Invesfigation of Human Ecology, Inc. ,
Fo r e s t Hi l l s, New York, December 1960. A wide var i et y of
mat er i al s i s r epr esent ed: schol arl y and scientific r epor t s ,
government al and organi zat i onal r epor t s, l egal di scussi ons,
bi ographi cal account s, fi ct i on, j ournal i sm, and mi scel l aneous.
The number of i t ems in each cat egory i s , respect i vel y, 139,
28, 7, 75, 10, 14, and 19, a total of 418. one or two sent ence
descr i pt i ons follow the t i t l es. These a r e r est r i ct ed t o an
i ndi cat i on of content and do not expr ess value judgements. The
f i r s t sect i on cont ai ns a number of especi al l y useful r ef er ences.
2. Compr ehensi ve Bibliography of Int errogat i on
Techni ques, Pr ocedur es , and Exper i ences, Ai r Intelligence
Informat i on Repor t , Uncl assi fi ed, 10 June 1959. Thi s
bi bl i ography of 158 i t ems dating between 1915 and 1957
compr i s es "the monogr aphs on t hi s subject available in the
Li b r a r y of Congr ess and ar r anged in alphabetical or der by
aut hor , o r i n t he absence of a n aut hor, by title. " No
descr i pt i ons a r e i ncl uded, except f or explanatory sub-t i t l es.
The monogr aphs, i n sever al l anguages, a r e not cat egori zed.
Thi s col l ect i on is ext r emel y heterogeneous. Most of the .
i t e ms a r e of scant o r per i pher al value to the i nt er r ogat or .
3. Int er rogat i on Methods and Technique s , KUPALM,
L- 3, 024, 941, Jul y 1959, Secret/NOFORN. Thi s bibliography
of 114 i t ems i ncl udes r ef er ences to four cat egori es: books
and pamphl et s, ar t i cl es f r o m peri odi cal s, cl assi fi ed document s,
and mat er i al s f r o m cl assi fi ed peri odi cal s. No descri pt i ons
(except sub-titles) a r e included. The range i s broad, so that
a number of nearly-irrelevant titles ar e included (e. g. ,
Employment psychology: the Interview, Interviewing in social
r esear ch, and "Phrasing questions; the question of bi as in
interviewing", f r om Journal of Marketing).
4. Survey of the Literature on Interrogation Techniques,
KUSODA, 1 March 1957, Confidential. Although now somewhat
dated because of the sigriilicant work done since i t s publication,
this bibliography remai ns the best of those l i st ed. It groups
i t s 114 i t ems in four categories: Basic Recommended Reading,
Recommended Reading, Reading of Limited or Marginal Value,
and Reading of No Value. A brief description of each i t em i s
included. Although some element of subjectivity inevitably
tinges these brief, cri t i cal apprai sal s, they a r e judicious; and
they a r e al so r eal t i me-savers f or i nt errogat ors too busy to
plough through the a c r e s of print on the specialty.
INDEX
A
Abnor mal i t i es, spotting of
Agent s
A l i ce i n Wonderland technique
Al l -Seei ng .Eye technique
Anxi ous, sel f-cent ered char act er
Ar r e s t s
As s es s ment , definition of
Bi -l evel functioning of i nt errogat or
B i ographi c dat a
Bona f ide s , definition of
Char act er wr ecked by success, the
C oe r cive i nt errogat i on
.C oncl usi on of i nt errogat i on
Conf e s s ion
Confinement
Confrontation of suspect s
i
C ont r ol , definition of
Conversi on
C oordi nat i on of i nt errogat i ons
i'
C ount eri nt el l i gence i nt errogat i on, definition of
C r o s s-exami nat i on
Page
s ee
Termi nat i on
38-41, 67, 84
see al so
Depr ivation of
Sensory Stimuli
86-87
47
4
51
7
4-5
58-59
Debility
Debriefing , definition of
Def ect or s
D eprivation of sensory stimuli
D e tailed que stioning
Detention of i nt errogat ees
Di rect i ves governing interrogation
D o cument s of defect ors
Double agent
Drugs
Dur ess
Page
see
Narcosis
see also
Coercive
Inter rogation
-- . ... . .
Eliciting, definition of
E nvir onment , manipulation of
Escapees
Espionage Act
Except i on, t he, a s psychological type
Fabr i cat or s
Fal s e confessions
F i r s t children
Galvanic skin response and the polygraph
Going Next Door technique
Graphology
G reedy-demanding charact er
Page
Guilt, feelings of
Guilt-r idden charact er
Heightened suggestibility and hypnosis
Indicators of emotion, physical
Indirect Assessment Pr ogr am
Informer techniques
Intelligence interview, definition of
I nt er pr et er s
Interrogatee s , emotional needs of
Interrogation, definition of
Interrogation, planning of
Interrogation setting
Int errogat or, desi rabl e characteristics of
Int errogat or ' s check l i st
Isolation
Ivan I s A Dope technique
Joint Interrogations
Joint i nt errogat ors, techniques suitable f or
Joint suspect s
Judging human nature , fallacies about
.Language considerations
Khokhlov, Nikolai
Page
LCFLUTTER
Legal consi derat i ons affecting KUBARK CI
i nt errogat i ons
Li st eni ng post f or i nt errogat i ons
Local l aws, i mport ance of
Magic r oom technique
Mal i ngeri ng , det ect i on of
Matching of i nt errogat i on met hod to. source
M i ndszent y, Cardinal, i nt errogat i on of
Mut t and Jeff technique
Nar cosi s
N ews f r o m Home technique
Nobody Loves You technique
Non-coerci ve i nt errogat i on
ODENBY , coordination with
Only chi l dren
Opening the. i nt er rogat i on
Opt i mi st i c char act er
Orderl y-obst i nat e char act er
Ordi nal position
0 rgani zat i on of handbook, explanation of
Out er and inner office technique
Pai n
Paus es , significance of
PBPRIME ci t i zens, i nt errogat i on of
Penetration agents
1 e r sonality , categories of
P e r sonalizing , avoidance of
Pl acebos
P lanning the counterintelligence interrogation
Police powers, KUBARK1s lack of
Policy considerations affecting KUBARK GI
inter rogations
P olygraph
Post-hypnotic suggestion
P robing
P rovocateur
P urpose of handbook
Rapport, establishment of
Rationalization
Reconnaissance
R ecording of interrogations
Refugees
Regressi on
R elationship, i nt errogat or- interrogatee
Repat ri at es
R eport s of interrogation
Resistance of i nt errogat ees
Resi st ance to interrogation
Respiration rat e and the polygraph
Schizoid charact er
Screening
Separation of i nt errogat ees
Silent drugs
Spinoza and Mort i mer Snerd technique
Page
St ruct ure of the interrogation
Swindlers
Systolic blood pr es s ur e and the polygraph
Techniques of non-coercive interrogation
Termi nat i on of interrogation
Theory of coercive interrogation
Thr eat s and f ear
Timing
Tr ansf er of interrogatee to host service
Tr ans f er r ed sources
Tr auma
T ravel er s
W alk- i ns
Witness techniques
Wolf in Sheep' s Clothing technique
Page
53-65
18-19
80