improving the accuracy of EWT- cognitive interview

• Who argued EWT could be improved if the police used better techniques? What should such techniques be based on?

  Fisher and Geiselman. Such techniques should be based on psychological insights into how memory works, they called these techniques collectively the cognitive interview.
• What is the cognitive interview? What's are its four techniques?

  A method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate memories. It uses four main techniques all based on psychological insights into how memory works: report everything, reinstate context, reverse the order and change perspective.
• Describe the four main techniques involved in the cognitive interview (RRRC)?

  1. Report everything: witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail of the event, though it may seem irrelevant/trivial. Trivial details may however be important and trigger other important memories.

  2. Reinstate context: witnesses should return to the original crime scene 'in their mind' and imagine the environment and their emotions at the time. This is related to context-dependent forgetting.

  3. Reverse order: events are recalled in a different order from the original sequence to prevent people reporting their expectations of how the event must have happened instead of reporting the actual events, it prevents dishonesty since it's harder to produce an untruthful account if they have to reverse it.

  4. Change perspective: recalling the incident from others perspectives disrupts effect of schema on recall- the schema you have for a particular setting may generate expectations of what would have happened and the schema can end up being recalled instead of what really happened.
• What is the enhanced cognitive interview?

  The enhanced CI focusses on the social dynamics of the interaction e.g the interviewer needs to know whether to establish eye contact at certain times. It also includes ideas such as reducing eyewitness anxiety, minimising distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly and asking open-ended questions.
• AO3: describe evidence that the CI works?

  A meta-analysis by Kohnken et al combined data from 55 studies comparing the CI with a standard police interview and found that the CI 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 CI is an effective technique in helping witnesses to recall information that may not be immediately accessible.
• AO3: Describe a counterpoint to the evidence that the CI works?

  Kohnken et al also found an increase in the amount of inaccurate information recalled by pps, particularly in the ECI. Cognitive interviews may sacrifice quality of EWT (accuracy) in favour of quantity (amount of details).

  This means police officers should treat eyewitness evidence from CI/ECI with caution.
• AO3: why may police officers hesitate to use the CI?

  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 CI also requires special training and many forces do not have the resources to provide more than a few hours. This suggest that the CI may not be a realistic method for police officers to use and it may be better to focus on a few key elements.
• AO3: why may it be hard to compare the effectiveness of different approaches in research studies?

  Because police forces have taken a 'pick and mix' approach to the various techniques in the CI. However this approach is more flexible as it means individuals can develop their own approach according to what works best for them, this means that the CI can still be somewhat useful for police.