Improving the accuracy of EWT: The Cognitive Interview Flashcards
What is the cognitive interview
The Cognitive Interview was originally developed by Geiselman et al in 1984. The Cognitive Interview aims to increase the accuracy of witness’ recall of events by providing them with cues to help with retrieval.
Traditional standard police interviews have been criticized for the use of lots of brief, direct and closed questions. Witnesses can be often interrupted and not allowed to talk freely. The use of leading questions is also an issue in the standard interview. Geiselman argued such interruption can break concentration and short answers generate less detail. He also argued that recall is better when witnesses are provided with retrieval cue and a rapport (relationship) is built up with the witness.
Therefore to overcome the problems of the standard interview the cognitive interview was developed which would increase the accuracy of witnesses testimonies. There are four principles of the cognitive interview:
What are the 4 principles of the cognitive interview
Context reinstatement or mental reinstatement of original context
Report everything:
Recall in changed order:
Recall from changed perspective
Explain Context reinstatement or mental reinstatement of original context
One of the principle techniques of the CI is where the interviewer encourages the interviewee to mentally recreate both the physical and psychological environment of the original incident.
For example, the interviewer could say, ‘Try to remember the context of the event in question. .i.e. recall the scene, weather, how you were feeling. etc.’
The aim is to make memories accessible. People often cannot access memories that are there. They need appropriate contextual and emotional cues to retrieve memories.
This is intended to trigger memory and is based on the principle of context-dependent and state dependent recall.
Explain report everything
The interviewer encourages the reporting of every single detail of the event without editing anything out, even though it may be seen as irrelevant. Witnesses should not leave anything out even if they believe it to be insignificant or irrelevant.
For example, the interviewer might say, ‘Report all you can remember, even what may seem like trivial information.’
The idea is that trivial information may aid in recall of more important details. By allowing the witness to recall everything, interruption is also avoided. Memories are interconnected with one another so that recollection of one item may then cue a whole lot of other memories. In addition the recollection of small details may eventually be pieced together from many different witnesses to form a clearer picture of the event.
Explain recall in changed order
The interviewer may try to alternative ways through the timeline of the incident, for example by reversing the order in which events occurred. The rationale behind this is that our recollections are influenced by schemas. For example, if you think about when you went to a restaurant a few weeks ago your recollection will be influenced by your general expectations (schema) of what is likely to happen at a restaurant – someone seats you at your table, a waitress takes your order etc. If you have to recall the event starting from the end of the event backwards, this prevents your pre-existing schema influencing what you recall.
For example, the interviewer might say, ‘I would like you to try something that sometimes helps people to remember more. I would like you to tell me what happened backwards. I know it sounds hard but I am going to try and help you. To start with, what is the very last thing you remember happening… what happened before that… etc.’
Using this technique may help because people will often remember what happened at the end best. Working backwards may therefore trigger extra memories. It also prevents dishonesty (as it is harder to produce an untruthful account if it has to be reversed).
Explain recall from changed perspective
The interviewee is asked to recall the incident from multiple perspectives, for example by imagining how it would have appeared to other witnesses present at the time. This is again done to disrupt the effect the schemas have on recall - sets of expectations people build up about certain situations types of people.
The interviewer might say. ‘Try to describe the event from different people viewpoints, not just your own. For example, if another person was at the scene, tell me what s/he may have observed.’
What is the enhanced cognitive interview
Fisher (1987) also developed the enhanced CI which also include the following principles:
1) Should actively listen
2) Ask open ended questions
3) Pause after each response
4) Avoid interruption
5) Encourage use of imagery
6) Adapt their language to suit the witness
7) Avoid any judgmental comments.
8) Minimize distractions.
Strengths of the Cognitive Interview
- Research suggests that the cognitive interview is effective
Gieselman et al (1985) showed participants videos of a staged crime and then tested different groups with cognitive interview, standard police interview, or an interview under the influence of hypnosis. He found that the cognitive interview generated more information.
Furthermore, a meta-analysis of 53 studies found, on average, an increase of 34% in the amount of correct information generated in the CI compared with standard interviewing techniques (Kohnken et al 1999). Moreover, Milne and Bull (2002) found that when pps were interviewed using a combination of ‘report everything and ‘mental reinstatement’ from the CI, their recall was significantly higher than just using one component of the CI. This suggests that using a combination of techniques in the CI is more effective than just one technique in the CI and thus improves the accuracy of EWT.
There is also evidence that as the cognitive interview not only generates more information but also more accurate information…
Explain Gieselman study fully
Method: In a staged situation, an intruder wearing a blue rucksack enters and steals a slide projector from a classroom. 2 days later, participants are questioned using either a standard interview or cognitive interview procedure. Early in the questioning, participants were asked the misleading question, ‘was the guy with the green backpack nervous?’ Later in the interview the participants were asked what colour the man’s rucksack was.
Results: participants in the cognitive interview condition were less likely to recall the rucksack as being green than those in the standard interview condition
Conclusion: The cognitive interview reduces the effect of leading questions
Weaknesses of the cognitive interview
The CI can be very time consuming, with the amount of time required not always available to the interviewer. Police may be reluctant to use the CI because it takes much more time than the standard police interview. For example, in the CI, more time is needed to establish a rapport with the witness and allow them to relax. This can then can comprise the accuracy of the EWT.
2) The CI requires that the interviewer receives a lot of training in order to see results.
Memon et al (1994) reported that when experienced detectives received relatively little training (4 hours) in CI, it did not produce any significant increases in the amount of information generated compared to standard interview techniques.
3)Many of the studies testing the effectiveness of the CI tested volunteer’s EWT in a lab, which may not generalize to everyday life – for example one of Gieselman’s study measuring the effectiveness of the CI involved pps watching a staged crime – watching a real crime and a staged crime is very different as the emotions experienced in a staged crime are less strong as was shown in studies measuring anxiety and EWT – therefore the findings from lab studies on CI may not represent findings in real life.
4) The CI technique has been less successful in improving recall with children. Geiselman (1999) found that the technique lead to children under 6 reporting events less accurately. This may be because they find instructions difficult to understand. The cognitive interview is however effective with children 8 years or above. Although research has shown that the CI is more successful in older (mean age 72) than younger pps (mean age 22). This was shown by Mello and Fisher (1996)
However it is difficult to test the effectiveness of the CI in the real world as police tend to use it selectively .i.e. they use some of the principles but not others.
