Good cop, bad cop

Lore & Background

In the technique, the 'bad cop' takes an aggressive, negative stance towards the subject, making blatant accusations, derogatory comments, threats, and in general creating antipathy. This sets the stage for the 'good cop' to act sympathetically, appearing supportive and understanding, and showing sympathy or even empathy for the subject. The good cop defends the subject from the bad cop. The subject may feel able to cooperate with the good cop, either out of trust or out of fear of the bad cop, and may then seek protection by the good cop and provide the information the interrogators are seeking.

Reader's Guide

When used as a negotiation tactic outside of interrogation, the good cop attempts to convince the counterpart to cut a deal by implying that the bad cop will return if no agreement is reached. The order can also be reversed: in this scenario, the good cop does most of the talking, while the bad cop intervenes only to apply pressure to elicit compliance. A disadvantage of this technique is that it can be easily identified, and the 'bad cop' may alienate the subject. The technique is noted in the context of the Reid technique and is related to concepts such as false confession and the carrot-and-stick approach.

Did You Know?

• The 'bad cop' emphasizes threats of punishment, while the 'good cop' emphasizes reward.
• A disadvantage is that the technique can be easily identified.