Cognitive Interview Flashcards
Cognitive Interview
A01- context re-instatement
Interview Similarity
- Memory of events eg crime= enhanced when psychological environment is SIMILAR to the environment at ORIGINAL EVENT
- External= weather, Emotional=Feelings of fear, Cognitive= relevant thoughts - features experienced at the time
- Retrieving information from memory= most efficient when the context of original event is re-created at time of recall
- Interviewers therefore instruct witness to MENTALLY RECREATE their COGNITIVE and EMOTIONAL STATES that existed at the time of the original event- “what were your thoughts and emotions during the crime”
Cognitive Interview
A01- Report everything
- Asking witnesses to report ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING, regardless of perceived importance of information
- Information from different witnesses can then be COMBINED and may produce. Useful lead for the police
- Such interviews require witnesses to describe people, objects and actions in more detail than civilians normally do in casual conversation so to promote EXTRAORDINARY DESCRIPTIONS= police officers convey EXPLICITLY their need for EXTENSIVE DETAIL (rarely done)
- This is due to witnesses withholding valuable information which they don’t think is relevant
- To minimise this, interviewer instruct witnesses to REPORT EVERYTHING they think about, whether trivial or out of chronological order or contradicting previous statement
- Emphasis on FOCUSED RETRIEVAL, one of the roles of interviews is to generate FOCUSED CONCENTRATION= no interruption to chain of thought and lots of ENCOURAGEMENT
Cognitive Interview
A01- Change the perspective
- Asking witnesses to recall the event from a VARIETY OF PERSPECTIVES
- Eg imagining what the scene must have looked like from the POV of several characters there at the time
- By taking on a different persons POV the witnesses should be less prone to letting OWN SCHEMAS DISTORTING MEMORY
- In addition, witnesses should be encouraged to make as many retrieval attempts as possible, even if say they can’t remember, should be encouraged to try ANOTHER ANGLE and even seemingly IRRELEVANT details are requested
Cognitive Interview
A01- Change the order
- By asking witnesses to recall the event in VARIOUS ORDERS, or in reverse order, starting from the most MEMORABLE EVENT etc
- Aims to reduce SCHEMA DISTORTION because recalling events in an unusual order may make the witnesses recall information which doesn’t FIT THEIR SCHEMA, as they don’t HAVE TIME to fill in the gaps
- Also interviewers should therefore be artful about NOT LEAKING INFORMATION to witnesses either NON VERBALLY eg smiling, paying increased attention when witness makes a particular statement
- Or VERBALLY eg asking leading or suggestive questions
Cognitive Interview
A01- Sequence
Sequence= designated order to maximise effectiveness of individual techniques
A) Introduction= established appropriate psychological states and interpersonal dynamics which promotes efficient memory and communication between witness + interviewer
B) Open ended narration= witness provides uninterrupted narrative of recollection of crime
C) Probing for details= Interviewer follows up by probing info-rich images, first framed by open end questions, then goes onto more specific probes
D) Review= reviewed statement to clarify ambiguities and resolve contradictions
E) Closing the interview- done by collecting official info eg contact info, encourage witnesses to contact them in the future
Cognitive Interview
A01- Effective social dynamics
Witnesses= asked to give detailed descriptions of intimate, personal experiences
Police= formal appearance (uniform) and fact they are complete strangers
-creates psychological barrier; therefore police officers should invest time at the start of the interview to develop a meaningful, personal rapport with the witness
Witnesses= First hand experience of crime, should do most of the mental work
Police= often dominate social interaction
-ask too many questions which produce brief answers; should construct the social dynamic where the witnesses perceive themselves as ‘experts’ and so the dominant person in the conversation (important with children)
Cognitive Interview
A01- Tested for effectiveness
- Examined in approximately 100 lab tests in the UK, US, Germany and Australia
- Volunteer witnesses (likely college students) observe either a live + non threatening crime or a film of stimulated crime
- Several hours- a few days later= face to face interview, either CI or control (which is either a standard or structured police interview)
- Usually tape recorded, transcribed and scored for number of correct or incorrect statements
- Across studies cognitive interview has produced between 25%-100% more correct statements than standard/structured interviews
Cognitive Interview
A01- Typical police interviews
- Often ask too many closed questions and too few open questions
- Interrupt witnesses in the middle of narrative descriptions
- Frequently ask leading questions
- consisted of standardised list of questions which has been criticised for using inappropriate questions, badly phrased questions and asked out of sequence
- Traditional Q+A format= excessive and hard for EW to concentrate causing reduced recall
Cognitive Interview
Evaluation- A03 Application
Strength-
The cognitive interview has been used successfully to solve several cases including a kidnapping, politically motivated bombing and child molestation. This presents strong evidence for its effectiveness in cueing the memories of witnesses to provide information on their experience of a crime. Therefore, this technique can be used subsequently to improve the accuracy of convictions and aid in the safety of a communities by reducing the number of dangerous criminals which walk free.
Cognitive Interview
Evaluation- A03 Reliability
Weakness-
The cognitive interview technique is composed of multiple techniques such as context reinstatement and report everything; however versions of these across various police forces differ, meaning comparisons on effectiveness are difficult to make. For instance the significant variation over the level of training received by police in different countries; European countries having cognitive interview as part of basic training whereas the US, Canada and Australia often have training which is poor quality or doesn’t translate into practise. Therefore, testing for the reliability is problematic as these different factors could influence the data, suggesting that our knowledge on the effectiveness of the cognitive interview is limited.
Cognitive Interview
Evaluation- A03 Generalisability
Weakness-
Geiselmann (1999) provides evidence that suggests the cognitive interview technique cannot be generalised to children. He suggests young children below the age of 8 may not benefit from this interview technique after finding the technique in this age group produces slightly less accurate information than other interview methods; such as the standard police interview. This could be detrimental to the investigations of crimes involving young children such those who have experience child abuse, implying the cognitive interview technique is limited in it’s effectiveness.
Cognitive Interview
Evaluation- A03 Supporting research
Strength-
Milne and Bull (2002) findings on the effectiveness of the cognitive interview technique support the interview method. They found the ‘report everything’ and ‘context reinstatement’ components of the cognitive interview seemed to be key techniques in gaining accurate and detailed recall. Therefore, supporting the approach that allowing the witness to rely all- even trivial information about a crime and attempting to place them back into the state they were in at the time of the crime act as effective memory retrieval methods. Improving the credibility around cognitive interviews effectiveness as a interview technique
