• More Blogs
• Observations »
• Bering in Mind »
• Cross-check »
• Extinction Countdown »
• Solar at Home »
• Expeditions »
• Guest Blog »
• Anecdotes from the Archive »

The ethics of enhanced interrogation techniques, detailed in a series of White House memos earlier this year, have come under growing fire in Washington and around the world. And the effectiveness of these practices—including sleep deprivation and waterboarding—have drawn increasing scrutiny in the scientific community.

A new review paper, published online today in Trends in Cognitive Science, investigates whether such intense approaches, labeled as torture by some, might be counterproductive to obtaining accurate information from suspects.

The use of coercive interrogation "is based on the assumption that subjects will be motivated to reveal veridical information to end interrogation, and that extreme stress, shock and anxiety do not impact memory," Shane O'Mara, a professor at the Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience in Dublin and the paper's lead author, said in a prepared statement. "However, this model of the impact of extreme stress on memory and the brain is utterly unsupported by scientific evidence."

Prolonged stress and subsequent changes in the body's hormone levels can have a negative effect on memory and learning, and "information presented by the captor to elicit responses during interrogation may inadvertently become part of the suspect's memory," the paper authors note. Similar false memories "recalled" during therapy or eyewitness testimony are well documented.

The report also describes such intense interrogation as a possible case of classical conditioning. If a suspect under interrogation is being repeatedly waterboarded, for example, when they are not talking, the detainee will likely come to associate talking—whether it is giving accurate or incorrect information—with safety and will be inclined to talk more (if not more truthfully). Likewise, "when the captive is talking, the captor's objective has been obtained," the authors note. Thus, the coercive techniques may encourage talking from both sides, but, as the researchers explain in the paper, "torture is as likely to elicit false as well as true information." 

Effectiveness aside, a report released in August by the nonprofit group Physicians for Human Rights condemned the role of mental and physical health workers in designing and overseeing harsh interrogation techniques.

Image courtesy of iStockphoto/slydeproductions

14 Comments

1. 1. Soccerdad 03:32 PM 9/21/09

   Pretty worthless report to answer the crucial question - did enhanced interrogation get the detainees to reveal important information which they otherwise would not have revealed.
   
   The report claims that "Prolonged stress and subsequent changes in the body's hormone levels can have a negative effect on memory and learning ...". But this is rather irrelevant. The use of these techniques is not intended to prompt them to remember or learn anything. It is to get them to reveal what they know and will not say.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. mbdsta 04:17 PM 9/21/09

   What do these guys know anyway, they're only scientists. It's not like they're Vice Presidents or something...

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. mbdsta 04:18 PM 9/21/09

   What do these guys know anyway? They're only scientists. It's not like they're Vice Presidents or something...

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. Chuck Darwin 05:07 PM 9/21/09

   @Soccerdad...Telling what you "know" requires that you remember it.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. Marc Lévesque 05:38 PM 9/21/09

   @soccerdad, I don't think that is a crucial question, maybe your, but not a.
   
   Compared to not using torture, does using torture raise or lower your overall level of security ?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. shadocat 05:53 PM 9/21/09

   The Military already knows this, The "enhanced interrogation" came from Dick Cheney, and other like-minded deviants.
   
   Paul Rester, the director of the Joint Intelligence Group, JTF Guantanamo, noted that, “Harshness and brutality can not result in detailed coherent information or knowledge. Remember, knowledge is the goal. It’s oxymoronic to assert that we are going to reduce a person by bending him to our will. Because then what is being asserted is that I’m going to reduce someone’s cognitive skills to a level below that which I can adequately have a conversation. If you think it through, it’s all contradictory. Intelligence gathering is fundamentally about being able to sit down and have a decent conversation with somebody in a fairly sublime setting,"
   http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/storyarchive/2008/February/022908-JIG.html
   
   The fairyland of mobile WMD labs in Iraq that Colin Powell presented to the United Nations came from the torment of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. In hindsight, we know without a doubt that this story was a complete fabrication.
   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501267.html
   
   I support this report's conclusion that victims babble to avoid torture, and would go one step farther and say that they will babble whatever their tormentor want's to hear.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. Soccerdad in reply to Chuck Darwin 10:59 PM 9/21/09

   Right. The issue wasn't that they happened to forget. They just weren't talking.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. notslic 11:29 PM 9/21/09

   Nothing like dangling them from the chopper by their ankles at 500 feet. They spoke plenty. The problem in Nam was that we couldn't understand them, so we dropped them anyway.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. dukeof512 02:30 AM 9/22/09

   There are other means to acquire information from the captured. Why torture and have them tell us where the strongholds are, when using different methods will have them tell us where the strongholds are and which ones are sabotaged.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. dukeof512 02:31 AM 9/22/09

    There are other means to acquire information from the captured. Why torture and have them tell us where the strongholds are, when using different methods will have them tell us where the strongholds are and which ones are sabotaged.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

11. 11. mo98 04:54 AM 9/22/09

    A widely used and subconsciously learned method of torture for generations remains to instill a feeling of guilt in the opponent(s), prisoner(s) or victims(s) . Seems pretty straightforward that bracing for starvation, sleep deprivation, pain and dismemberment will not work and may result in antisocial rebellion. But science has got to start somewhere in order to get this right?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

12. 12. frgough 11:06 AM 9/22/09

    Nothing like political agenda wrapped up in the priestly mantle of science.
    
    Fact. The terrorists we waterboarded sang like canaries with highly useful and accurate information.
    
    Undebatable conclusion: The tactic was effective.
    
    In science, the discussion is over and the matter settled. Time to move on to the next experiment.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

13. 13. Soccerdad in reply to dukeof512 12:18 PM 9/22/09

    Please expound on the "different methods" which can get all this information from one who is refusing to talk. And you say it can get even more information than "torture"?
    
    Tell us what you know that the CIA does not about interrogation. Perhaps Obama could hire you as a consultant to the CIA. You could solve this entire debate with your advanced knowledge. Or is it too secret to let us in on it?
    
    Or are you like Mr. O. Making claims that you can do it in a smarter way, when in reality you really don't have a plan at all. Just arrogance and overconfidence.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

14. 14. stricklandbrent 10:45 PM 9/22/09

    I think we just need to run a torture study. Good luck getting IRB approval!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this