Cognitive interviews - AO3

Question 1

What is are two strengths of cognitive interviews?

Answer 1

• P: Strength = evidence shows it works
• E: Kohnken et al (1999): Meta analysis combined data from 55 studies comparing cognitive interview with the standard police interview
• E: The CI gave an average 41% increase in accurate information compared with the standard interview. Only 4 studies in the analysis showed no differences between the types of interview
• L: Shows CI is an effective technique in helping witnesses recall information that is stored in memory but not immediately accessible

‎

• P: Strength = variations of the CI
• E: Police forces take a “pick and mix” approach in practice which makes it hard to compare effectiveness in studies
• E: However, this approach makes it more flexible because pole forces evlove their own approaches depedning on what they think works best
• L: This variation is a benefit of the CI because it can be adpated to different situation, increasing its credibility for officers, though not for empirical research

Question 2

What are limitations of cognitive interviews?

Answer 2

• P: Limitation = not all elements are equally effective
• E: Bull and Milne (2002): Each technique produced more information than the standard police interview
• E: Using a combination of 1 and 2 produced better recall than any other elements or combinations of them
• L: Casts doubt on the credibility of the overall cognitive interview
  ‎
• P: Limitation = more time consuming
• E: More time is needed to establish rapport with a witness and allow them to relax
• E: CI reqiures special training and many forces do not have resources (Kebbell and Wagstuff (1997))
• L: Suggests it is not a realistic method - better to focus on just a few key elements