|
|
|
Competition is Stiff
in Training
Language Analysis and Interviewing and Interrogation
A number of companies provide training
in language analysis and interviewing and interrogation. They
use different terminology for language analysis such as content
analysis, scientific content analysis (SCAN), forensic language
analysis, forensic linguistics, and psycholinguistics. For
interviewing and interrogation different terms such as behavioral analysis
interviews, non-verbal analysis, body language, and many others are
used.
However, many of the methods currently taught may be obsolete and
based on old science. Many have been around in the United
States since the 1980's and earlier and very little has been done to upgrade the
training. Law enforcement agencies, private security
companies, corporate security, and corrections departments have
spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to gain training that is over
25 years old. There has been substantial progress during this
period and many of the old concepts have been proven wrong by
academic and applied research. The polygraph has been
systematically attacked through research and case study and it is
often suggested that it fails to measure up to
satisfactory lie detection standards. Its successor, Layered Voice
Analysis is gaining ground but has yet to be fully accepted by
many of the prominent law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
However, this may be a simple matter of economics because of the
prominence of polygraph and the concern for a loss of venue.
One must ask that if a new technology replaces the polygraph what is
the economical and political impact on polygraph manufacturers and
long-time users? Yet, a great deal of emphasis is still
focused on training and use of a technique which has been under fire
for at least the past ten years.
There are several companies making substantial profits yet they really have not updated their training content in
forensic language analysis or interview and interrogation for the
past 20-25 years. Believing that
their methods are tried and true they may view any upgrades as unnecessary.
And regardless of how one looks at training methodology, its hard to
question what has been highly successful in the past.
Considering that this is a highly competitive market, and sales of
training products are crucial to maintaining a market share, it is
difficult to disagree with this philosophy. Because these
entities continue to generate more
than substantial revenue, there is little expectation for change.
It may be considered impractical to fix something if it isn't broke?
Obsolescence is not a consideration. These companies include John Reid and Associates, Laboratory for
Scientific Interrogation (LSI), Behavior Analysis Training Institute
and many others. By far, John Reid and Associates are the top
dogs of the market. Avinom Sapir and his company, Laboratory
for Scientific Interrogation (LSI) rank a distant second. All
highly respectable companies, these organizations may fall short on
keeping up with cultural and psychological advances in both forensic
language analysis and interview and interrogation.
A newcomer to the field is Forensitec. Beginning in 2004, the
company began developing markets all over the United States due to
the fact that many departments were looking for new innovation and
higher standards by which to measure success in both language
analysis and interview and interrogation. Forensitec moved
from Arizona to Montana in 2005 and has been providing more
up-to-date
training throughout the northwest and the U.S. An affiliate
research member of the Center for the Management of Information
(CMI) at the University of Arizona, Forensitec continues to provide
updated methods in their training modules which directly result
from research conducted at CMI. A company to watch, we'll see
if they ever measure up to the revenue standards of John Reid and
Associates or LSI. |
|
|
