Memory - Cognitive Interview

Question 1

cognitive interview (CI)

Answer 1

questioning technique used by the police to enhance retrieval of information about a crime scene from a victim or EWs memory
CREATED BY FISHER + GEISELMAN (1992)

Question 2

features of CI

Answer 2

report everything
context reinstatement
change perspective
reverse the order

Question 3

report everything

Answer 3

EWs are as reports every detail (even if it’s irrelevant) – may trigger key info on event

Question 4

context reinstatement

Answer 4

interviewer mentally reinstates environmental + personal context E.G. general activities / feelings on day
EWs are asked to use all five senses in recall – triggers context dependent memories

Question 5

change perspective

Answer 5

EWs asked to describe what are the witnesses or the criminal may have seen - reduces EWs use of prior knowledge, expectations or schema

Question 6

reverse the order

Answer 6

EWs should report backward from enter start – less lightly to use their schemas

Question 7

recency effect

Answer 7

recall recent events clearer

Question 8

enhanced CI

Answer 8

Fisher et al (1987) develop some additional elements of the CI to focus on the social dynamics of the CI E.G. the interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to relinquish it
the ECI also includes reducing EW anxiety, reducing distractions, getting the EW to speak slowly and asking open-ended questions.

Question 9

strengths of CI

Answer 9

Milne + Bull (2002) found that nay part of CI was better than police interviews (context and report all work best)
Kohnken et el (1999) did a meta-analysis from 50 studies - ECI gave more correct info
Geiselman et al (1985) showed videos of a simulated crime ad tested groups with CI, PI and hypnosis - CI was best.
Kohnken et al (1999) found the ECI had an 81% increase of correct info remembered
HOWEVER
61% increase of incorrect info

Question 10

limitations of CI

Answer 10

Kebbel + Wagstaff (1996) argued police couldn’t use CI as it uses more time + needs training
lacks reliability across interviews
ethical issues brings up past in 4 diff ways