memory - cognitive interview

Question 1

Cognitive interview - AO1
intro

Answer 1

• Fisher and Geiselman (1992)
• used by police to interview witnesses after crime/incident
• facilitates most accurate, detailed memory
• uses open-ended questions
• to trigger memory and prevent dishonesty

Question 2

What are the 4 components of cognitive interview?

Answer 2

• Recall Everything
• Context Reinstatement
• Recall in reverse
• Recall from changed perspective

Question 3

Recall Everything (RE) - AO1

Answer 3

Describe:
- witnesses asked to report all details of event and the environment
- even if it seems trivial

How it improves EWT accuracy:
- Acts as a trigger to memory

e.g. “start from the beginning, what happened the morning of the robbery?”

Question 4

Context Reinstatement (CR) - AO1

Answer 4

Describe:
- witness mentally places themselves back at event scene
- imagine environment, weather, emotions, what they could see

How it improves EWT accuracy:
- uses context and state dependent cues
- helps trigger memories that may appear forgotten
- however they are not accessible due to retrieval failure (context/state reinstatement)

e.g. “close your eyes…what were you thinking, what was the weather like, what was x wearing, how were you feeling when…”

Question 5

Recall in reverse (RO) - AO1

Answer 5

Describe:
- witness asked to recall events in different chronological order
- e.g. from end to start

How it improves EWT accuracy:
- Prevents witnesses reporting what they expected to happen (schema)
- instead of what actually happened
- prevents dishonesty as harder to lie when having to reverse story

e.g. “Tell us what happened from when you entered the bank”

Question 6

Recall from changed perspective (CP) - AO1

Answer 6

Describe:
- witness asked to recall incident from another persons perspective who witnessed e.g. perpetrator, another witness

How it improves EWT accuracy:
- prevents witnesses reporting what they expected to happen (schema) instead of what happened

e.g. imagine you are the bank robber…what do you see?”

Question 7

Research to support - AO3
Koknken et al (1999)

Answer 7

P - research to support CI comes from Koknken et al (1999)

E - meta-analysis of 55 studies comparing CI and standard interviews was used

E - Reported that CI had an increase of 41% of accurate information
- compared to standard interview
- only 4 studies showed no difference between type of interviews

L - supports CI as effective
- in improving EWT accuracy
- helps witnesses recall info that is stored in memory but not easily accessible

Question 8

criticism - AO3
False positives

Answer 8

P - Koknen et al suggets more info remembered with CI compared to standard interviews (81%)

E - However often more incorrect items are recalled
- 61% increase of incorrect info recalled in CI
- compared to standard

E - known as false positives

L - weakness of CI
- more incorrect info = false imprisonments
- wasting police time
- damage to the economy
- reducing effectiveness of CI in improving EWT accuracy

Question 9

Think further - AO3
False positives negatively affect economy

Answer 9

• false positives = negative effect on economy
• if witness statements not accurate = more interviews
• false imprisonments
• waste of prison space and police time
• tax payers money can be used elsewhere to benefit society
• reducing credibility that CI may have
• improving EWT accuracy

Question 10

Weakness - AO3
Milne and Bull

Answer 10

P - not all techniques of CI equally as effective
- Milne and Bull (2002)

E - found that each of the 4 techniques used alone
- produced more information
- than the standard interview

E - also found using RE and CR together
- produced better recall than any other elements

L - CI not used effectively
- only certain parts are useful in producing accurate recall
- so limiting effectiveness of CI