A/HRC/43/49 levels of anxiety, stress, shame and guilt amounting to “severe mental suffering”, as required for a finding of torture.59 76. More generally, in order to ensure the adequate implementation of the prohibition of torture and related legal obligations in present and future circumstances, its interpretation should evolve in line with new challenges and capabilities arising in relation to emerging technologies not only in cyberspace, but also in areas such as artificial intelligence, robotics, nanotechnology and neurotechnology, or pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences, including so-called “human enhancement”. IV. Conclusions and recommendations 77. On the basis of the above observations and considerations on the substantive dimensions of the concept of “psychological torture”, and informed by broad stakeholder consultations, the Special Rapporteur, to the best of his knowledge and judgment, proposes the conclusions and recommendations set out below. 78. Prevalence. Psychological torture occurs in a wide variety of contexts, including ordinary criminal investigations, police detention, “stop-and-search” operations, intelligence gathering, medical, psychiatric and social care, immigration, administrative and coercive detention, as well as in social contexts such as domestic violence, mobbing, cyberbullying and political or discriminatory persecution. 79. General recommendations. Psychological torture constituting a subcategory to the generic concept of torture, the Special Rapporteur herewith reiterates the general recommendations of his mandate (E/CN.4/2003/68, para. 26) and emphasizes their full applicability, mutatis mutandis, to methods, techniques and circumstances amounting to “psychological torture”. 80. Non-coercive investigation. Given the practical importance of continuing to clarify the fault lines between permissible non-coercive investigative techniques and prohibited coercive interrogation, the Special Rapporteur reaffirms the conclusions and recommendations in the thematic report submitted by his predecessor (A/71/298) and invites States to actively support the ongoing process towards developing international guidelines on investigative interviewing and associated safeguards. 81. Istanbul Protocol. Personnel tasked with medical examinations, the determination of migration status or the judicial adjudication of potential cases of torture should be provided with function-specific training in the identification and documentation of the signs of torture and ill-treatment, in accordance with the updated Protocol. 82. Specific recommendations. More specifically with regard to the notion of “psychological torture”, the Special Rapporteur recommends that States adopt, incorporate and implement the following definitions, interpretations and understandings throughout their national normative, institutional and policy frameworks, including, in particular, their training and instruction of medical, judicial, administrative, military and law enforcement personnel. 83. Working definitions. For the purposes of human rights law, “psychological torture” should be interpreted to include all methods, techniques and circumstances which are intended or designed to purposefully inflict severe mental pain or suffering without using the conduit or effect of severe physical pain or suffering. Conversely, “physical torture” should be interpreted to include all methods, techniques and environments which are intended or designed to purposefully inflict severe physical pain or suffering, regardless of the parallel infliction of mental pain or suffering. 84. 59 20 Constitutive elements: In the context of psychological torture, Samantha Newbery and Ali Dehghantanha, “A torture-free cyber space: a human right”, 2017.