Improving the accuracy of eyewitness testimony, Flashcards
Improving the accuracy of eyewitness testimony
Numerous studies have indicated that eyewitness testimony lacks accuracy due to factors such as anxiety, leading questions, and post-event contamination.
Fisher (1987) studied techniques used by the police in Florida when interviewing witnesses. The following factors in this ‘standard interview’ that he felt needed improvement:
•Witnesses were given a large number of quick and direct closed questions in a short time.
•The order of the questions was not matched to the witnesses’ mental representation of the event.
•Witnesses were not allowed to talk freely about their experience, and were frequently interrupted.
In response to these issues Fisher and Geiselman developed the Cognitive interview (1985) and suggested that police use it in order to improve the accuracy of the eyewitness testimony.
The cognitive interviews
The four parts of the Cognitive Interview are Context Reinstatement,
mentally returning to the scene of the crime, including the environmental and emotional state as these act as cues for the recall of more information,
Report Everything, witness should report all details even those that seem irrelevant, Recall from a changed perspective, mentally recreate how the crime would be recalled from the perspective of other witnesses and the perpetrator. This ‘holistic’ view of events is intended to minimise biases of the witnesses and disrupt schemas which may be influencing the accuracy of their recall, and finally Recall in reverse order,
recall in different orders chronologically, for example from end to beginning or middle to start to check accuracy of original statement, and to prevent schemas from affecting recall.
An improved cognitive interview called the Enhanced Cognitive Interview was developed by Fisher and Geiselman in 1987. It focused on building trust between the interviewer and the witness so that the witness felt more comfortable disclosing information.
The Enhanced cognitive interview focusing on the interviewer not distracting the witness, the witness controlling the flow of information, asking open-ended questions, getting the witnesses to speak slowly so that all of what they are saying can be understood, reminding witnesses not to guess and that ‘Don’t know’ is an option where necessary, and offering comments to clarify statements, and finally it focuses on reducing anxiety in the witness and getting them to relax.
Holliday (2003) adapted the cognitive interview to form the Modified Cognitive interview which can be used on children and people with learning difficulties
Evaluation of the Cognitive Interview
•Fisher, Geiselman, and Adador (1989) did field research where 16 detectives from the Florida police department were divided into two matched pairs groups based on their previous performance at interviewing. One group received CI training and the other acted as a control group so had no additional training. After training the CI group gained 63% more information in subsequent interviews than the untrained group. This suggests that the Cognitive Interview is an effective method for improving the information gained by real interviewing police officers operating in the field.
•This is also supported by Memon (2010) who reviewed 57 studies comparing CI, ECI, or MCI to control groups. Memon found that CI interviews produced more accurate recall than non-CI interviews, especially in older people.
•Geiselman and Fisher (1997) found that the cognitive interview greatly improved the accuracy of eyewitness testimony suggesting that it has higher validity than the standard interview
