MEMORY Flashcards
Define coding
Format in which info is stored
Define capacity
The amount of info that can be held in a memory store
Define duration
Length of time info can be held in memory
What is STM capacity, coding type and duration
CAPACITY: 5- 9 seconds
CODING: Acoustic (sound)
DURATION: 18-30 seconds
What is LTM coding, capacity and duration
CODING: Semantic (meaning)
CAPACITY: unlimited
DURATION: potentially forever
State the produced of research into coding (BADDELEY)
- participants had to recall lists of words in correct order.
- 4 groups:
- acoustically similar words
- acoustically dissimilar word
- semantically similar words
- semantically dissimilar words
STM RECALL: particpants had to recall immediately
LTM RECALL: recall after 20 mins
What were the findings of the research into coding (BADDELEY)
Findings:
STM recall: tended t do worse with acccousitcally similar words.
LTM recall: did worse with semantically similar words
- this suggests info coded semantically in LTM.
State the research into capacity - JACOBS
- Measured digit span
- researcher gave participants 4 digits then particpants asked to recall them aloud.
- if correct, researcher reads out 5 digits and so on until participant can no longer recall in correct order anymore.
- this determines the digit span.
State the findings into research into capacity (Jacob’s)
Found:
- mean span for digits: 9.3 items
- mean span for letters: 7.3 items
State what MILLER found about the capacity of STM
- Noticed things come in 7s e.g 7 days in week, 7 deadly sins ect
- suggest that the span for capacity of STM about 7 items (+ or minus 2)
- however miller also noted that people can recall 5 words as they can recall 5 letters
- done this by chucking
Peterson and Peterson research -PROCEDURE
- tested 24 undergrads
- each student took part in 8 trials
- 1 trial-= 1 test
- each student given CONSONANT SYLLABLE to remember
- also 3 digit number to count back from (prevent rehearsal)
- each trial told to stop after different amount of time (3,6,9,12,15,16) (RETENTION INTERVAL)
Peterson + Peterson- FINDINGS
- Recall worse as seconds increased
- suggests STM may be very short duration
- unless rehearsed
Bahrick research into duration of LTM- procedure
- 392 participants
- age 17-74
-high school year books gathers from participants - recall tested by:
1) photo recognition test
2) free recall
BAHRICK research into duration of LTM- findings
- participants tested within 15 yrs of graduation were about 90% accurate (photo)
- after 48yrs, recall declined to about 70% (photo)
- Free recall= less good than recognition
- after 15yrs = 60% accurate (free recall)
- after 48yrs = 30% accurate (free recall)
Shows LTM can last very long time
Research into CODING
EVALUATION
ARTIFICIAL STIMULI
LIIMITATION
- study used artifical stimuli rather than meanigful material
- word lists= no personal meaning to participants
- means have to be cautious about generalising findings of different kinds of memory tasks
- EXAMPLE: when processing more meaningful info, people may use semantic coding even in STM tasks
- suggests that the findings from this study have limited application
Research into CAPACITY
EVALUATION
LACKING VALIDITY
(Jacob= old)
- LIMITATION
- Jacob’s study conducted long time ago
- early research in psych lacked adequate control
- EXAMPLE:
- Some participants may have been distracted while they were being tested do they didn’t perform as well as they might have.
- this would mean that results might NOT be valid because there were CONFOUNDING VARIABLES that weren’t controlled.
HOWEVER- results of study have been confirmed in other research, supporting its validity.
Research into CAPACITY
EVALUATION
NOT SO MANY CHUNKS
LIMITATION
- millers research= may have overestimated capacity of STM
- EXAMPLE: Cowan 2001- reviewed other research and conducted that the capacity of STM was only about 4 chunks
- suggests that’s millers estimate of 5 is more appropriate than 7.
Research in DURATION
EVALUATION
MEANINGLESS STIMULI IN STM STUDY
LIMITATION
- Peterson + Petersons study used artifical stimuli material
- trying to memories constant syllables does NOT reflect most real life memory activities where what we are trying to remember is meaningful
- so some may say study lacked EXTERNAL VALIDITY
HOWEVER
- we sometimes do remember fairly meaningless things
E.g phone numbers
- so study not totally irrelevant
Research into DURATION
EVALUATION
HIGH INTERNAL VALIDITY (Bahrick)
STRENGTH
- it has higher validity
- real life meaningful memories were studies
- when studies on LTM have been conducted on meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall relates = LOWER (Shepard 1967)
- downside of such real life research= confounding variables not controlled
E.g participants may have looked at yearbooks and rehearsed their memory over years
What is the MSM
A representation of how memory works in terms of 3 stores
What are the 3 stores in MSM?
- Sensory register
- STM
- LTM
What is the sensory register?
The memory store for each of our 5 senses
- Coding in the iconic sensory register= visual
- Coding in echoing sensory register= acoustic
What is the capacity and duration of sensory register?
CAPACITY: HUGE (only what is paid attention to can be passed don to STM)
DURATION: very short (less than half a second)
Is the sensory register under cognitive control?
NO, info coming from the senses is detected and recorded automatically.
How can things from STM pass to LTM?
Rehearsal
What are the 2 types of rehearsal?
MAINTENANCE- repeating info
ELABORATIVE- linking to info already in LTM
How is info lost from LTM?
DISPLACEMENT (new info)
DECAY (lost over time)
MSM
EVALUATION
EVIDENCE THAT THE STM AND LTM STORES ARE SEPARATE PROCESSES
• Glanzer and Cunitz 1966
• Asked participants to free recall word list in any order
• Found recall was much stringer for words at the start and at end of list.
• Results suggest thee are separate short + long term memory stores, with the words first heard entering LTM and being recalled (primary effect) and the most recent words being held by STM and being recalled (recency effect)
• Struggled to recall middle words (displaced)
MSM
EVALUATION
There is more than one type of STM
• The MSM states that STM is a unitary store (only 1 type of STM)
• However, evidence from people suffering from AMNESIA shows that this CANNOT BE TRUE
• Example:
• Patient studied KF, patient with amnesia
• found that KF’s STM for digits was very poor when they read them out loud to him
• But recall was much better when he was able to read digits himself.
• Further studies of KF and other people with amnesia showed that there could be another STM store for non verbal sounds (such as noises)
• The unitary STM is a limitation of MSM because research shows that at the very least there must be 1 STM store to process visual info and another to process auditory info
MSM
EVALUATION
There is more than 1 type of rehearsal
• Acorfing to MSM, what matters is rehearsal is the amount of it that you do.
• So more rehearsal of info, the more likely you transfer it to LTM.
• HOWEVER: CRAIK+WATKINS 1973- found that his prediction = wrong
• What really matter sis rehearsal type.
• Discovered 2 types of rehearsal
• MAINTENANCE REHEARSAL = type described in MSM
• But this type does not transfer info to LTM
• Just maintains it in STM
• ELABORATIVE REHEARSAL- needed for long-term storage
• Occurs when toy link the info to your existing knowledge, or you think about what it means
• very serious limitation of MSM as it is another research finding that cannot be explained by model.
MSM
EVALUATION
Cognitive experiments testing aspects of the MSM are often highly artificial
- highly artificial
- lacks external validity
- low ecological validity, results collected in lab environment may not be generalisable to other naturalistic situations like school and work
- also lack of mundane realism, experimental tasks testing the MSM are unlike how people use their memory in real life scenarios
What are the 3 types of LTM?
Episodic- episodes in our lives
E.G a gig you went to last week
Semantic- knowledge of the world
E.G knowledge of things like animals
Procedural- actions/ skills/ how we do things
E.G driving a car
What is a declarative/ explicit memory?
Consciously recalled and can be put into words
What is a non declarative/ implicit memory?
Can’t be consciously recalled and is difficult to put into words
E.g how to actually walk/ride a bike
What types of long term memory are declarative and which are non declarative
DECLARATIVE= episodic and semantic
NON DECLARATIVE= procedural
List facts/ features of episodic memory
- declarative
- time stamped (stored with reference to time + place)
- recalled consciously
- autobiographical (you are part of the memory)
- easiest memories to forget
- level of emotion felt at time, influences strength of memory
- first coding in prefrontal cortex, stored across the brain connected by hippocampus
List facts/features about semantic memory
- declarative
- may not recall when learnt/encoded (not time stamped)
- recalled consciously
- not autobiographical (nit in semantic memory)
- resistant to forgetting
- how deeply processed influences strength
- parahippocampal cortex
Lists facts/ features about procedural memory
- non declarative
- often learnt in childhood
-not timestamped - not recalled consciously
- very resistant to forgetting
- not autobiographical
- how many times practiced influences strength of memory
- motor cortex and cerebellum
Types of long term memory
EVALUATION
CLINICAL EVIDENCE
(Clive wearing and HM)
- both severely impaired due to amnesia
- episodic memory severely impaired
- semantic memories relatively unaffected
- procedural memories also intact
- Clive could still play piano (was world class musician)
- but couldn’t remember musical education
- knows he has kids but not their names
- knows wife but everytime he sees her he thinks its the fist time in ages.
- evidence supports Tulvings view that there are different memory stores in LTM
- one store can be damaged, others unaffected
- clear evidence that not only these types of memory different but also stored different places in brain.
Types of LTM
EVALUATION
NEROIMAGING EVIDENCE
• Evidence from brain scans studying that different types of memory are stored in different parts of brain.
• EXAMPLE:
• Tulving 1994- got participants to perform various memory tasks while their brains were scanned using PET scanner. Found episodic + semantic memories both recalled in prefrontal cortex
• Left prefrontal cortex= recalling semantic memories
• Right pre frontal cortex = episodic memories
• strength of these findings is it supports view that there is physical reality to different types of LTM in brain.
Types of LTM
EVALUATION
Three types of LTM or 2?
• Cohen + Squire 1980, disagreed with Tulving’s division of LTM into 3 types.
• They accept that prodedural memories represent one type of LTM.
• But argue episodic and semantic memories stored together in one LTM store that they call DECLARITAVE MEMORY i.e memories that can be consciously recalled.
• In contrast to procedural memories that are non declarative.
Types of LTM
EVALUATION
Other evaluation
• the use of ideographic research e.g Clive wearing allows researchers to study memory in way that would be impossible experimentally.
• Problems with generalising the findings of these clinical case studies with 1 or fewer individuals, to explaining how memory works in the wider population
• There could be other unknown issues unique to that individual that can explain the behaviour.
What is the WMM?
A representation of STM
- it suggests that STM is dynamic processor of different types of info using sub-units coordinated by a central executive.
Who proposed the WMM and why?
BADDELEY + HITCH 1974
- to replace the STM store of the MSM sue to criticisms of the STM.
- STM must be more complex than just 1 singular unitary store that only exists to pass info on to LTM.
What are all the sections in the WMM?
Central executive
Phonological loop:
- primary acoustic store
- articulatory process
Visual spatial sketchpad:
- visual cache
- inner scribe
Episodic buffer
Describe the central executive
- head of model
- controls attention
- receives sense info + filters before passing on to sub system
- limited capacity (4 items)
- works in one type of info at time
- but can switch attention between different inputs
Describe the phonological loop
Phonological loop:
- deals with auditory info
- limited capcity (about 2 seconds of words)
Primary acoustic store:
- words you hear
- holds info via sub vocal repetition
Articulatory process:
- allows maintenance rehearsal (repeating sounds or words)
Describe Visio spatial sketchpad
Visual spatial sketchpad:
- processes visual + spatially coded info
- limited cavity about 3-4 objects
Visual cache:
- passive store in form of colour
Inner scribe:
- active store holding the relationship between objects in 3D shapes
Describe the episodic buffer
Episodic buffer:
• added to WMM in 2000
• As model needed a general store to hold the integrate into from VSS, PL, CE and LTM
• as a response to criticism of model
WMM
EVALUATION
CLINICAL STUDY (KF)
• Support for WMM comes from Shallice + Warringtons 1970 case study KF
• After damage happened to KF, had poor STM ability for verbal info but could process visual info
• I.e he had difficulty with sounds but could recall letters and digits.
• This suggests that just his phonological loop had been damaged leaving other areas of memory intact.
• Supports the existence of a separate visual and acoustic store.
• However evidence from brain-damaged patients may not be reliable because it concerns unique cases with patients who have had traumatic experiences.
WMM
EVALUATION
DUAL TASK PERFORMANCE (BADDELEY study)
• BADDELEY 1975
• Particpants asked to perform 2 visual taks, tracking racing moving lights at the same time as describing the angles og letter F.
• Or a visual and verbal task.
• FOUND:
• That performances were much better when the tasks were not using the same processing
• it’s suggest s that the VSS and the PL exist as separate systems and the capacity of VSS can be overwhelmed with visual info.
WMM
EVALUATION
LACK OF CLARITY OF CENTRAL EXECUTIVE
• Cognitive psychologists suggest that this component of WMM is unsatisfactory and doesn’t really explain anything.
• BADDELEY himself recognised this when he said ‘it’s the most important but least understood part of working memory’.
• The central executive needs to be more clearly specified than just ‘attention’
• So psychologists believe it may consist of separate components
• This means WMM hasn’t fully been expanded.
WMM
EVALUATION
Research usually lab based
- therefore highly controlled with string internal validity
- however issues with external validity in most studies n memory task lack mundane realism
- therefore may not be generalised to how we use memory in day to day life
What is interference?
Forgetting because 1 memory blocks another, causing 1 or both memories to be distorted/ forgotten
What is proactive interference?
Forgetting occurs when older memories (already stored) disrupt the recall of newer memories
- degree of forgetting is greater when memories are similar
What is retroactive interference
Forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories already stored.
- degree of forgetting greater when memories are similar
What is the relevance of similarity in interference?
Interference more likely to occur when 2 pieces of info are similar
- this is due to RESPONSE COMPETITION
What is the relevance of time sensitivity in interference?
Interference is less likely to occur when there is a large gap between the instances of learning.
McGeoch + McDonald study into effects of similarity on retroactive interference
Procedure
- particpants learn list of 10 words and then learn new list and recall original list after
Interfering material (stopped rehearsal of original list):
- synonyms
- antonyms
- unrelated to original words
- constant syllables
- 3 digit numbers
- no new list (control group)
McGeoch + McDonald study into effects of similarity on retroactive interference
FOUND
- When participants then recalled original list of words, their performance depended on nature of second list.
- most similar material (synonyms) produced worse recall
- shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar
Greenberg and Underwood 1950- research into proactive interference
Procedure
- asked participants to learn 10 paired word lists
- then gave participants 48hrs before recall
- repeated 4 times
Greenberg and Underwood 1950- research into proactive interference
Findings
- found the number of correctly recalled word pairs decreased the more word pairs had been learnt previously.
- this provides evidence for pro-active interference, as previously learnt word combos caused confusion in the coding of the later lists, interfering with the accurate recall of later learnt word lists.
What is retrieval failure?
- form of forgetting
- occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues to assess memory
- memory is available but cannot access it
What is the encoding specific principle?
- states that if a cue is to help us recall information, it has to be present at encoding (learn material) and at retrieval (when recalling it).
CONTEXT DEPENDENT FORGETTING
- RESEARCH
- GODDEN + BADDELEY 1975
PROCEDURE
- Carried out study of deep divers working underwater
- divers learnt list of words either underwater or on land
- then asked to recall words either underwater or on land
4 conditions:
LEARN ON LAND- RECALL ON LAND
LEARN ON LAND- RECALL ON LAND
LEARN UNDERWATER- RECALL ON LAND
LEARN UNDERWATER - RECALL UNDERWATER
CONTEXT DEPENDENT FORGETTING
- RESEARCH
- GODDEN + BADDELEY 1975
Findings
- accurate recall was 40% LOWER in the non- matching conditions
- external cues available were different from the ones at recall and this led to retrieval failure
STATE DEPENDENT FORGETTING
CARTER + CASSADAY 1988
Procedure
- gave anti histamine drugs to particpants
- anti histamine had mild sedative effects, making participants slightly drowsy.
- creates an internal physiological state different from ‘normal’ state of being awake and alert
- participants has to learn list of words and passages and the recall it.
4 conditions:
• learn on drug- recall when on it
• Learn on drug- recall not on it
• Learn not on drug- recall when on it
• Learn not on drug- recall when not on drug.
STATE DEPENDENT FORGETTING
CARTER + CASSADAY 1988
Findings
- in conditions where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning + recall, performance on memory test was significantly worse
- so when cues are absent, there is some forgetting
Retro + pro active interference
EVALUATION
Evidence from lab studies
EVIDENCE FROM LAB STUDIES
• Lots of lab experiments have been carried out into this explanation into forgetting.
• McGeoch + McDonald’s research
• Most of the studies show that both types of interference are very likely to be common ways we forget info from LTM.
• Strength as lab experiments control the effects of irrelevant influences so give us confidence that interference is a valid explanation for at least some forgetting.
Retro + pro active interference
EVALUATION
ARTIFICIAL MATERIAL;
• Much greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in the lab than real-life situations for one good reason.
• The stimulus materials used inmost studies= list of words
• Learning lots of actual words is def more realistic than learnig lists of consonant syllables.
• But this is still distant from things we learn and try to remember in everyday life e.g peoples faces, birthdays ect.
• Limitation because use of artificial tasks makes interference much more likely in lab
• Interference may not be as likely an explanation for forgetting in everyday life as is in lab.
Retro + pro active interference
EVALUATION
REAL LIFE STUDIES
• Some research studies have considered interference effects in more everyday situations.
• BADDELEY + Hitch 1977- wanted to find out if interference was a better explanation for forgetting than the passage of time.
• Asked rugby players to try to remember names of teams they had played so far in the season, week by week.
• Because most of the players had missed games, for some the ‘last team’ they played might have been 2 weeks ago, or 3 or more.
• Results very clearly showed that accurate recall did not depend on how long ago matches took place.
• Much more important was the number of games they played in the meantime.
• So a players recall of a team from 3 weeks ago was better if they had played no matches since then.
• Study shows interference explanations can apply to at least some everyday situations.
Retrieval failure
EVALUATION
Supporting evidence
• The studies by GODDEN + Baddleey and Carter + Cassaday= 2 examples of research.
• Eysenck 2010- goes so far as to argue that retrival failure is perhaps the main reason for forgetting from LTM
• STRENGTH because supporting evidence increases the validity of an explanation.
• Especially true when the evidence shows that retrival failtire occurs in real-life situations as well as in the highly controlled conditions of the lab.
Retrieval failure
EVALUATION
Questioning context effects
• BADDELEY 1997- argues that context effects are actually not very strong, especially in real life.
• Different contexts have to be very different indeed before an effect is seen.
• Example:
• It would be hard to find an enviroment as different from land as underwater.
• Contrast, learning something in one room and recalling in another unlikely to result in much forgetting because these environments generally not diffferent enough.
• limitation as it means that the real-life applications of retrival failure due to contextual cues don’t actually explain much forgetting.
Retrieval failure
EVALUATION
Recall verus recognition
• The contextual effect may be related to the kind of memory being tested.
• GODDEN + BADDELEY 1980- replicated their underwater experiment but used a recognition test instead of recall- particpants had to say whether they recognised a word read to the from the list, instead of retrieving it for themselves.
• When recognition was tested there was no context- dependent effect; performance was same in all 4 conditions
• further limitation of context effects because it means that the presence or absence of cues only affects memory when you test it in a certain way.
What are eye witness testimonies?
Ability of people to remember details of events
- can be affected by factors like misleading info, leading questions and anxiety
What is a leading question?
Question which, because of way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer.
Example: ‘ was he knife in the accused left hand?’- suggests answer is ‘left hand’.
Research into leading questions affecting EWT?
Loftus and Palmer 1974
Procedure
- particpants (students) watch film clips of car accident then answer questions about accident
- in critical question (leading question) particpants asked hoe fast cars were travelling
‘ about how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’ - leading question because verb ‘hit’ suggests the speed car was travelling.
- there were 5 groups of participants asked to say how fast cars travelling
- VERBS: hit, contacted, bumped, collided and smashed
Research into leading questions affecting EWT?
Loftus and Palmer 1974
Findings
- mean estimated speed was calculated for each group of particpants.
- Verb CONTACTED- mean estimated speed= 31.8 mph
- Verb SMASHED- mean estimated speed= 40.5 mph
- leading question biased the EW recall of event.
What is the RESPONSE- BIAS EXPLANATION?
Suggests that the wording of the question has no real effect on participants memories, but just influences how they decide to answer
What is SUB-SITUATION EXPLANATION?
The wording of a leading question actually changes the participants memory of film clip
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR LOFTUS AND PALMERS RESEARCH ON LEADING QUESTIONS
Loftus and palmer 1974- conducted 2nd experiment that supported the sub- situation explanation- the wording of a leading question actually changes the participants memory of film clip.
- particpants who originally heard ‘smashed’ later ere more likely to report seeing broken glass (there was none)than those who heard ‘hit’
- critical verb altered their memory of incident.
What is post event discussion?
When co-witnesses to crime discuss it with each other, their EWT may become contaminated.
- this is because they combine (mis)info of other witnesses with their own memories.
Research into POST- EVENT DISCUSSION
GABBERT 2000
Procedure
- studied participants in pairs.
- each participant watched a video of same crime, but filmed from different points of view
- meant each participant could see elements in event others couldn’t
- both participants then discussed what they had seen before individually completing test of recall.
Research into POST- EVENT DISCUSSION
GABBERT 2000
Findings
- found 71% of particpants mistakenly recalled aspects of the event they did not see in video but picked up on in discussion
- corresponding figure in control group (no discussion) 0%
- Gabbert el al concluded witnesses often go along with each other, either to win social approval or because they believe other witnesses are right or wrong
- called MEMORY CONFORMITY
FACTORS EFFECTING EWT- MISLEADING INFO
EVALUATION
Useful real-life applications
• Strength of all research into misleading info is that it has hugely important practical uses in real world.
• Where consequences of inaccurate EWT can be very serious.
• EXAMPLE:
• Loftus believes that leading questions can have such a distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their questions when interviewing eyewitnesses.
• research into EWT is one area in psychology that psychologists believe they can make an important positive difference to lies of real people
• For instance improving way legal system works and by appearing in court trials as expert witnesses.
FACTORS EFFECTING EWT- MISLEADING INFO
EVALUATION
The tasks are artificial
• Limitation of Loftus + Plamer’s study= their particpants watched film clips of car incidents.\
• very different experience from witnessing real accident (mainly as they lack stress)
• Somme evidence that emotions can have influence on memory.
• Limitation as studies that use such artificial tasks may tell us little about how leading questions affect EWT in cases of real accidents/ crimes.
• could even be that researchers (such as Loftus) are too pessimistic about the accuracy of EWT
FACTORS EFFECTING EWT- MISLEADING INFO
EVALUATION
Individual differences
• Evidence that older people less accurate than younger people when giving eyewitness reports.
• Example:
• Anastasi + Rhodes 2006- found that people in age group 18-25 and 35-45 were more accurate than people in age group 55-78 yrs.
• However, all age groups were more accurate when identifying people of their own age group (OWN AGE BIAS)
• Research studies often use younger people as the target to identify + this may mean that some age groups appear less accurate but in fact this is not true.
What is a cognitive interview?
Method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate memories
- uses 4 main techniques, all based on well- established psychological knowledge of human memory.
Who proposed cognitive interviews?
FISHER + GEISELMAN 1992
- Argued EWT could be improved if police used better techniques when interviewing witnesses.
- recommended such techniques should be based on psychological insights into how memory works
What are the 4 technique for cognitive interview?
- REPORT EVERYTHING
• Witnesses encouraged to include every single detail of event even if it may seem irrelevant
• Seemingly trivial details may be important and may trigger other important memories.
- REINSTATE THE CONTEXT
• Witness should return to original crime scene ‘in mind’ and imagine the enviroment (e.g weather) and her emotions (e.g what were they feeling)
• This is related to CONTEXT- DEPENDENT FORGETTING. - REVERSE THE OLDER
• Event should be recalled in different chronological order to original sequence (e.g from final point back to beginning, or from middle to beginning).
• Done to prevent people reporting their expectations of how event must have happened rather than the actual events,
• Also prevents dishonesty. - CHANGE PERSPECTIVE
• Witnesses should recall incident from others people perspectives
• Example: how it would have appeared to other witnesses or to perpetrator.
• Done to disrupt the effect of expectations + schema on recall.
Explain the ENHANCED COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
- FISHER ET AL- developed some addition element to cognitive interview to focus on the social dynamics of the interactions
- e.g interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to get rid of it.
- enhanced CI also includes ideas such as:
- reducing eyewitness anxiety
- minimising distractions
- getting witnes to speak slowly
- asking open- ended questions
COGNITIVE INTERVIEWS
EVALUATION
The CI is time-consuming
• Police may be reluctant to use the CI as takes much more time than standard police interviews.
• Example:
• More time needed to establish rapport with witness and allow them to relax.
• The CI also requires special training, many forces have not been able to provide more than a few hours.
• Means it’s unlikely that the ‘proper’ version of the CI is actually used, which may explain why police have not been that impressed by it.
COGNITIVE INTERVIEWS
EVALUATION
Some elements may be more valuable than others
• Milne + Bull 2002- found each individual element was equally valuable.
• Each technique used singly produced more info than the standard police interview.
• HOWEVER:
• Milne + Bull found that using a combination of REPORT EVERYTHING and CONTEXT REINSTATMENT produced better recall than any of other conditions.
• This confirmed police officers suspicions that some aspects of CI are more useful than others.
• this finding = strength as it suggests that at least these 2 elements should be used to improve police interviewing of eyewitnesses even if full CI isn’t used.
• This in turn increases credibility of CI amongst those who use it- police officers.
COGNITIVE INTERVIEWS
EVALUATION
Support for the effectiveness of the enhanced cognitive interview
• research suggests that enhanced CI may offer special benefits.
• Example:
• Meta analysis by Kohnken et al 1999 combined data from 50 studies
• Enhanced CI consistently provided more correct info than the standard interview used by police.
• strength as studies such as one indicate that there are real practical benefits to the police of using the enhanced version of CI.
• The research shows that it gives the police a greater chance of catching + charging criminals, which is beneficial to society as a whole.
