Improving the accuracy of eyewitness testimony: Cognitive Interviem Flashcards
Who developed the Cognitive Interview and when?
Fisher and Geiselman in 1992.
What is the Cognitive Interview (CI)?
A method of interviewing eyewitnesses based on cognitive psychology principles to improve memory recall.
What is the first technique in the Cognitive Interview?
Report everything – Witnesses are asked to recall every detail, even if it seems irrelevant or unclear, as it may trigger other memories.
What is the second technique in the Cognitive Interview?
Reinstate the context – Witnesses mentally return to the crime scene and recall the environment and their emotional state, aiding context-dependent recall.
What is the third technique in the Cognitive Interview?
Reverse the order – Events are recalled in different sequences to prevent the use of schemas and reduce dishonesty.
What is the fourth technique in the Cognitive Interview?
Change perspective – Witnesses describe the event from the viewpoint of others, such as bystanders or the perpetrator, to challenge schemas.
What is the Enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI)?
A version of the CI developed by Fisher et al. (1987) that includes additional techniques focusing on improving the social interaction between interviewer and witness.
What are key features of the Enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI)?
Managing eye contact, reducing anxiety, minimizing distractions, using open-ended questions, and encouraging slow, detailed responses.
Why is the ECI considered more effective than the original CI?
It improves communication and builds witness comfort, leading to more accurate and complete recall.
strength of COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
One strength of the cognitive interview is evidence that it works.
For example, a meta-analysis by Günter Köhnken et al. (1999) combined data from 55 studies comparing the Cl (and the ECI) with the standard police interview. The Cl gave an average 41% increase in accurate information compared with the standard interview. Only four studies in the analysis showed no difference between the types of interview.
This shows that the Cl is an effective technique in helping witnesses to recall information that is stored in memory (available) but not immediately accessible.
limitation (1) of COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
One limitation of the original Cl is that not all of its elements are equally effective or useful.
Rebecca Milne and Ray Bull (2002) found that each of the four techniques used alone produced more information than the standard police interview. But they also found that using a combination of report everything and reinstate the context produced better recall than any of the other elements or combination of them. This confirmed police officers’ suspicions that some aspects of the Cl are more useful than others.
This casts some doubt on the credibility of the overall cognitive interview.
limitation (2) of COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
Another limitation is that police officers may be reluctant to use the Cl because it takes more time and training than the standard police interview.
For example, more time is needed to establish rapport with a witness and allow them to relax. The Cl also requires special training and many forces do not have the resources to provide more than a few hours (Kebbell and Wagstaff 1997).
This suggests that the complete Cl as it exists is not a realistic method for police officers to use and (as in the point above) it might be better to focus on just a few key elements.
