Cognitive interview

• Fisher and geiselman

  • Identified problems with standard police interviewers
  • The interviewer does most of the talking
  • Specific questions asked forcing responses
  • Questions often predetermined so weren’t fluid
  • Witnesses discouraged from giving further info and leading questions may be unconsciously used
• Enhanced cognitive interview

  • Interviewers are trained when to and not to use eye contact
  • Reduce anxiety (calming, breathing slowly)
  • Minimise distractions
  • Only ask open ended questions
• What are the 4 steps of the cognitive interview

  • Report everything
  • Reinstate context
  • Change order
  • Change perspective
• Strengths

  • Individual differences - Ci particularly useful to older witnesses (they are prone to leading questions)
  • Mello and fisher - compared older men to younger men’s memory using standard interview and cognitive interview, the ci was significantly better for recall in older men
  • Kohnken - combined data from 55 studies and found an increase of 41% of correct information generated in the Cl compared to standard interview
  • Milne and Bull - tested each of the four components of the Cl. They found no real difference individually, but when used together significantly higher recall.
• Weaknesses

  • Quantity vs quality - The procedure is designed to enhance quantity of correct recall without compromising quality.
  • However kohnken - found an 81% increase of incorrect information when the enhanced CI was compared to a standard interview.
  • officers say it takes more time and training than is available – prefer to use deliberate strategies aimed to limit an eyewitnesses report to the minimum amount of key elements
  • there is no longer just one procedure (e.g Thames Valley Police are trained practically the same but don’t use the changing perspectives component)