Question Design and Risk of Distortion of Information in the Examination Report (BAP): A Forensic Linguistic–Psycholinguistic Analysis Based on the Distortion Risk Index

The Examination Report (BAP) is a key document in the judicial process because it records the testimony of the parties being questioned, but the question-and-answer format and evidentiary orientation have the potential to reshape the representation of testimony. This article analyzes the relationship between question design in the BAP and cognitive load and the risk of distortion through a forensic linguistics–psycholinguistics approach. The study applies Directed Qualitative Content Analysis (DQCA) with three components: (1) coding of question types (open, closed, leading, suggestive, confrontational, multi-part), (2) coding of cognitive load indicators (episodic recall, multi-component, quantification, topic switching, linguistic complexity), and (3) measuring the Distortion Risk Index (IRD) based on a score of 0–2 on nine distortion mechanisms (DR1–DR9). The unit of analysis is the investigator's questions (Q) and answers (A) mapped to the ID–EV–KR–PB–PN segments. These findings indicate that the KR contains more open-ended questions, while the PB and PN are dominated by confirmatory/presuppositional questions. Cognitive load increases in KR and PB, while EV/PN is relatively lighter but carries the risk of triggering compliance/commitment. Micro-analysis of Q–A indicates a shift from narrative elicitation to premise-based verification. IRD is offered as a practical, replicable tool to identify distortion hotspots and guide question design improvements