Improving eye witness testimony - Cog interview

Question 1

Describe the “recall everything” technique

Answer 1

• witnesses asked to record every detail even if it seems trivial may act as a trigger to a memory

Question 2

Describe the “context reinstatement” technique

Answer 2

• witness asked mentally to place themselves mentally back at the scene of the event.
• external cues may trigger memories of the event that may appear forgotten but are currently not accessible due to retrieval failure

Question 3

Describe the “recall in reverse” technique

Answer 3

• witness asked to recall in a different chronical order from end to start
• prevents witnesses reporting what they expect to happen rather than what happened prevents dishonesty, harder to lie with a reverse story

Question 4

Describe the “recall from changed perspective” technique

Answer 4

• witness asked to recall incident from another persons perspective who witnessed the crime EG: witness or perpetrator
• may prevent witnesses reporting what they expect to happen rather than what happened?

Question 5

AO3 for cog interview

Answer 5

• RTS Kohnken
• meta analysis of 55 studies comparing cog interv With stand interv
• reported Ci had an increase of 41% in accurate information compared to a standard interview
• 4 studies showed no difference
• supports cog interview is an effective technique in improving the accuracy of EWT bc it helps witnesses to recall info stored in memory but not easily accessible
• further weakness = not all techniques are equally affective

Milne&Bull found all 4 tech used alone produced more info than the standard interview

• also found combo of report everything and context reinstatement produced better recall of any other element
• weakness as CI not equally as effective only certain aspects effective
• Thus limiting effectiveness of the CI in improving accuracy of EWT