Gieselman Evaluation

Question 1

Strength EV

Answer 1

A strength of this story is that it has high control over extraneous variables,
Which are variables that could have an undesirable effect on the results if they are not properly controlled affecting the internal validity of the results.
As the experiment was a laboratory experiment, extraneous variables, such as the length of time participants watched the video for can be controlled.
This means we can be certain the difference in the accuracy of recall was caused by the different interviews and not other factors.

Question 2

Limitation EV

Answer 2

A limitation of this study is that has low ecological validity,
Which is when the findings of a study cannot be generalised to real life settings meaning the results have low external validity.
This is because participants knew they were only watching a film and not real life crimes, meaning their reactions and behaviour would not be the same for a real life event.
In this way, the results may not apply to the effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview for real events.

Question 3

Strength effectiveness 1

Answer 3

A strength of the Cognitive Interview is that it is more effective than the standard interview, as shown by research
From Geiselman (1985),
Who found that, in a study where 89 participants were shown videos of crimes, participants correctly recalled an average of 41 statements using the CI, compared to only 29 with the standard interview.
This suggests that CI improves the accuracy of eyewitness testimonies.

Question 4

Strength effectiveness 2

Answer 4

A strength of the Cognitive Interview is that there is support for the effectiveness of the enhanced CI
From Kohnken (1999);
Who found that, in a meta-analysis of 50 studies the enhanced cognitive interview consistently provided more correct information than the standard interview.
Research such as this highlights the practical benefits to the police of using the enhanced CI.

Question 5

Strength useful

Answer 5

A strength of the Cognitive Interview is that all elements of it have been found to be valuable as shown by
Milne and Bull (2002).
They also found that a combination of report everything and context reinstatement produced better recall than any of the other techniques used individually.
This suggests that these two elements at least should be used to improve interviewing techniques of eyewitness even if the full CI isn’t used.

Question 6

Limitation time consuming

Answer 6

A limitation of the Cognitive Interview is that it is time consuming, as shown by research
From Kebbell and Wagstaff (1996).
They found that, use of the CI requires special training and many police forces have not been able to provide more than a few hours and that police are reluctant to use it, as is takes longer than the SI.
This means that it us unlikely that the proper version of the CI is being used.

Question 7

Limitation inaccurate recall

Answer 7

A limitation of the Cognitive Interview is that it produces an increase in inaccurate information as shown by research
From Kohnken et al (1999).
They found an 81% increase in correct information but also a 61% increase in incorrect information when the enhanced CI was used compared to the SI.
This suggests that the olice should continue to use the CI, but should treat all information that they collect with caution.