Cognitive Interview

• (AO1) When was the cognitive interview developed? And why?

  1985, in response to criticisms of traditional police interviews - to improve the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in comparison to the standard police interview.
• (AO1) What did Fisher et al (1987) do and find?

  Studied police interviews in Florida and found that witnesses were often presented with a series of short, closed questions, which attempted to elicit facts.
• (AO1) As a result, what did Geiselman et al (1985) develop?

  The cognitive interview, identifying 4 key principles that they believed would enhance recall
• (AO1) Define 2 key principles of the cognitive interview (report everything and mental reinstatement of context)

  1)Report everything = The interviewee freely describes everything without interruption. (Link to theory) = Avoiding leading questions and reduces reconstructive errors.

  2)Mental reinstatement of context = Interviewee mentally recreates the original enviornment, recalling details like attire and prior activities. = This uses cues/triggers to enhance memory, incl. non-event related details.
• (AO1) Define 2 key principles of the cognitive interview (changing the order and change perspective)

  3)Changing the order = Interviewee recalls events in a different sequence = reducing reliance on schemas for more accurate recall, not expectations of event.

  4)Change perspective = Interviewee recalls events from another POV = witness/perpetrator
• (AO1) State Geiselman's aim, method, results and conclusion

  Aim = Examine the effectiveness of the cognitive interview

  Method = 89 students watched a simulated crime video. 2 days later, interviewed either with standard police interview or cognitive interview.

  Results = Students using cognitive interview recalled significantly more correct information, with a similar number of errors in both groups.

  Conclusion = The cognitive interview improves the quantity of recalled information without increasing incorrect information.
• (AO3) Give a strength of Geiselmam referencing Fisher et al (1989) 


  Point = Examined cognitive interview effectiveness in real police interviews.

  Evidence = 16 detectives recorded interviews using standard police interviews. Divided into two groups: 1) Trained to use the cognitive interview. 2) Control group continued using the standard interview. The subsequent interviews were recorded and analysed.

  Results = trained detectives elicited 46% more information than control group. Over 90% of confirmed information was accurate.

  Conclusion = Supports G findings + C I effectiveness

   
• (AO3) Give a limitation point of cognitive interview using Centofani & Reece

  Point = Although C I increases quantity of information recalled, research found that cognitive interview still susceptible to misleading info.

  Evidence = C & R showed ppts a bank robbery video, followed by misleading or neutral post-event summary. Ppts questioned using a cognitive interview recalled 35% more information.

  Results = both groups equally susceptible to misleading qs

  Conclusion = C I enhances information quantity, but interviewers must avoid leading questions or post-event discussion.
• (AO3) Give a limitation point of cognitive interview referecning Kebbel & Wagstaff (1996)


  Point/Evidence = Although research supports the effectiveness of the cognitive interview, Kebbel & Wagstaff (1996) have found that police typically use interviewing techniques that limit the quantity of information provided, rather than those that improve accuracy.

  Evidence /Evaluate: Furthermore the cognitive interviews require special training and many police forces have not provided more than rudimentary training, which explains why the cognitive interviews is not readily used.