Cognitive interviews: improving accuracy of EWT

• Fisher and Geiselman (1992) argue that it is possible to improve their accuracy when using an interview strategy that draws on explanations of forgetting already covered. This is known as the cognitive interview.
• The standard police interview involves the interviewer leading the interview with predetermined questions that may be forced choice. Instead, following the cognitive interview techniques will allow the interviewee to provide a more accurate testimony.
• 1.recall everything. The eyewitness is encouraged to recall absolutely everything they can remember about the event. This does not need to be in any particular order and every detail should be included even if the details seem minor. This could trigger additional memories about the event.
• 2. Reinstate the context

  Here the eyewitness is asked to recreate both the internal and external context at the time of the crime.Internal context is how they were feeling at the time and external context is where they were. This is related to context-dependent forgetting. This will trigger cues that allows for retrieval of otherwise forgotten information.
• 3. Recall in reverse order

  The eyewitness should recall details in different orders e.g. recalling from the final thing that happened to the first thing that happened. This reduces the chance of expectations (schema) affecting what is recalled as opposed to what was actually witnessed. This also reduces the chance of
• 4. Recall from different perspectives

  The eyewitness should recall the events from another person's point of view. This other person could be the offender or another eyewitness. expectations (schema) affecting what is recalled.
• Fisher et al (1987) added to the cognitive interview by including additional features designed to further increase the accuracy of recall. These additional features include the interviewer being an active listener. This can be conveyed through eye-contact (but also knowing when to sequence this to avoid intimidation). The interviewer should encourage the witness to relax and speak slowly, ensuring distractions are minimised and aim to reduce their anxiety as much as possible.
• Strength - supporting evidence. Study where intruder went into classroom with blue rucksack and stole projector. 2 days later asked with standard police interview or cognitive interview. All asked leading question of if the guy with the green backpack was nervous. All later asked what colour the rucksack was. Cognitive interview group produced best recall and less likely to be influenced by the leading question. Supports the cognitive interview.
• However, a limitation of the cognitive interview is that it can be quite time consuming to conduct. Kebell et al (1999) surveyed police officers in the UK. They expressed concern with the amount of time the cognitive interview takes to carry out compared to a standard interview, plus the fact that it requires officers to be specially trained to administer it. This might mean that it is not always the most practical technique to employ. This is a limitation because police forces may not have the funding to use the cognitive interview in all circumstances.
• A further limitation is that the cognitive interview may not be suitable for all interviewees. Geiselman (1999) reviewed a number of studies and concluded that the age of the witness is a factor to consider when deciding whether to use the cognitive interview. He found that the cognitive interview worked less well for children under the age of 6. This is because they might find the instructions quite difficult to understand. This limits the applicability of the technique.
• A final limitation concerns how useful each of the techniques actually are. Milne and Bull (2002) argue that some techniques from the cognitive interview are more effective than others. For example, they found that recalling everything and reinstating the context when combined lead to a more accurate testimony overall in comparison to when any of the other techniques were combined. The fact that some elements are not as effective questions how valid this method is in its entirety.