Experiences of asylum interviews by asylum officials, interpreters and asylum seekers in Finland

Purpose: Recent legal psychological research has highlighted shortcomings in asylum interviews; however, few studies have examined how the interview participants (interviewer, interpreter and asylum seeker) experience and perceive the interviews. The purpose of this study was to explore how these interview participants experience rapport and communication within asylum interviews, as well as to investigate how well interviewers’ and interpreters’ views align with empirical evidence regarding best-practice interviewing. Design/methodology/approach: Interviewers (n = 62), interpreters (n = 63) and asylum seekers (n = 49) answered an online survey with mainly closed questions about preparation, rapport, interview content, interpretation and overall experiences of the interviews. Interviewers and interpreters reported experiences from interviews conducted in 2021, whereas asylum seekers referred to their interview experiences from 2016 to 2022. Data were explored descriptively. Findings: The views of interviewers and interpreters were mostly aligned with evidence-based interviewing recommendations. However, contrary to recommendations, interpreters reported favouring closed questions over open prompts. Most asylum seekers reported feeling nervous or afraid during the interviews, and three-fourths reported difficulties in sharing their experiences and disclosing personal information. This indicates that more work on how to build rapport in cross-cultural, interpreter-assisted interviews is needed. The interpreters’ preference for using closed questions presents a risk to interview quality that should be mitigated through training for interpreters as well as improved collaboration between interviewers and interpreters. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore experiences of asylum interviews from the perspectives of interviewers, interpreters and asylum seekers.