The Cognitive Interview (Ci)

Front 1

Who devised the Cognitive Interview Technique?

Back 1

Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Front 2

In regards to the legal system, why have psychologists attempted to devise methods to improve retrieval/accuracy of EWT?

Back 2

EWT is important in the legal system and has serious consequences when/if it goes wrong

Front 3

In regards to findings, what other reason is there for devising methods to improve retrieval/accuracy of EWT?

Back 3

Findings regarding unreliability of eye-witness accounts

Front 4

What is the Cognitive Interview Technique (CI)?

Back 4

Questioning technique used by police for interviewing witnesses to a crime

Front 5

What is the purpose of the CI?

Back 5

To enhance retrieval of information

Front 6

What are the four main stages of CI?

Back 6

1. Context reinstatement (CR)
2. Report everything (RE)
3. Recall in reverse order (RO)
4. Recall from changed perspective (CP)

Front 7

Outline Fisher et al. (1987) study
What did they do?

Back 7

Observed real interviews conducted by experienced Florida detectives for four months

Front 8

Outline Fisher et al. (1987) study
What was found?

Back 8

1) Frequent bombardments of brief, direct, close ended questions
2) Interrupted
3) Questions out of sync with witness' mental representation of event

Front 9

Outline Fisher et al. (1987) study
Why did they believe interruptions in an interview to be unhelpful?

Back 9

Broke witness' concentration and encouraged shorter, less-detailed answers

Front 10

Outline Fisher et al. (1987) study
On the basis of these findings, what are the 8 additional features to the CI Fisher et al. suggested?

Back 10

1. Actively listening to witness
2. Minimizing distractions
3. Asking open-ended questions
4. Avoiding interruptions
5. Encouraging of imagery
6. Adaptation of language to suit witness
7. Pauses after each response
8. Avoiding judgmental comments

Hint 10

1. Attentiveness
2. Attention span
3. No suggestion of possible answers
4. No breaking concentration
5. Images
6. Harmony
7. Pausing
8. Not being rude

Front 11

Briefly outline the report everything (RE) stage of CI

Back 11

Interviewee is encouraged to report each and every detail of the event even if deemed irrelevant - could help trigger key info.

Front 12

Briefly outline the context reinstatement (CR) stage of CI

Back 12

Interviewee is encouraged to mentally recreate the environment in their from original incident

Front 13

What sorts of features from the environment is the interviewee encouraged to remember in CR?

Back 13

Weather, sights and sounds, thoughts and feelings, events prior

Front 14

Briefly outline the recall in reverse order (RO) stage of CI

Back 14

Alternative ways through timeline of interview may be tried i.e. reversing order in which events occurred

Front 15

Why might reversing the order in which events occurred aid in retrieval?

Back 15

Due to the recency effect, people recall recent events clearer

Front 16

Briefly outline the recall from changed perspective (CP) stage in CI

Back 16

Interviewee is encouraged to recall the event from a number of perspectives: imagining how others who may have been present at the time would have seen it

Front 17

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Geiselman et al. (1985) study
What was their aim?

Back 17

To investigate effectiveness of CI

Front 18

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Geiselman et al. (1985) study
What was the procedure? What did participants have to watch?

Back 18

1) Participants watched film of violent crime
2) Interviewed by policeman using either CI, SI, or hypnosis
3) Errors and correctly recalled facts were noted

Front 19

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Geiselman et al. (1985) study
What was found?
Was CI effective?
What had CI led to an improvement in in regards to memory and relevant information?

Back 19

CI more effective in eliciting facts (average no. 41.2)
Hypnosis (38.0)
SI (29.4)
CI led to better memory of events (witnesses able to recall more relevant info. than in SI)

Front 20

Real world applications
Stein and Memon (2006)
What did they do?

Back 20

Tested effectiveness of CI in Brazil: first time this has been done in developing country

Front 21

What is the current style of questioning in Brazil and what remains prevalent throughout the criminal justice system?

Back 21

Current style of questioning: interrogative
Prevalent features of CJS: suspects subjected to torture and other forms of maltreatment

Front 22

Real world applications
Stein and Memon (2006)
What was the procedure?

Back 22

Women from cleaning staff from large uni. had to watch video of abduction

Front 23

Real world applications
Stein and Memon (2006)
What was found about CI in comparison to SI?
What did it increase the amount of in regards to the witnesses?

Back 23

In comparison to SI, CI increased amount of correct info. recovered from witnesses

Front 24

Real world applications
Stein and Memon (2006)
What else was found in regards to forensics?

Back 24

CI was better at producing forensic info i.e. a lady was able to give a detailed description of a man holding a gun - later resulted in police being able to establish which abductor was armed

Front 25

Real world applications
Stein and Memon (2006)
What do these results show?
How is CI legally effective?

Back 25

CI is effective in the reduction of miscarriages of justice

Front 26

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Fisher et al. (1990)
What did they do?
What did they do with the detectives and genuine crime witnesses?

Back 26

Trained detectives to use enhanced interview techniques with genuine crime witnesses

Front 27

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Fisher et al. (1990)
What was found?
What did EIT significantly increase the amount of?

Back 27

Significantly increased amount of information recalled

Front 28

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Kebbel et al. (1999)
What did they do?

Back 28

Conducted survey of police officers in UK

Front 29

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Kebbel et al. (1999)
What was found?
What was there a greater and lesser use of?

Back 29

The use of CI was prevalent and officers generally found it useful
HOWEVER.
greater use of report everything and context reinstatement stages of CI; lesser use of and recall in reverse order and changing perspective stages

Front 30

Supporting evidence for CI
Outline Kebbel et al. (1999)
What concerns did the officers express about CI in regards to information and time?

Back 30

The amount of incorrect info and how long it took to complete interview

Front 31

Outline Milne and Bull (2002) study
What was the purpose of this study?
What were they testing in regards to the stages of CI?

Back 31

To Kebbel et al. (1999) findings - some components of CI more effective than others

Front 32

Outline Milne and Bull (2002) study
What was the procedure?
How did they test the stages of CI?

Back 32

CI components were either tested by themselves or combined on undergraduates and children

Front 33

Outline Milne and Bull (2002) study
What was found about the four stages by themselves?
What was the most effective combination?

Back 33

All four components produced higher recall by themselves than SI
HOWEVER
The most effective combination was CR and RE which was supportive of what the UK officers had suspected

Front 34

Outline Milne and Bull (2002) study
What is one drawback of this study?

Back 34

It was conducted in a lab. and is thus artificial

Front 35

Which area has CI not proved very successful and who discovered this?

Back 35

Questioning young children
Geiselman (1999)

Front 36

Outline Geiselman (1999) study
What did he review and conclude in regards to children under six and the accuracy of their reporting of events and CI techniques?

Back 36

Reviewed numerous studies and concluded children under 6 reported events less accurately in response to CI techniques

Front 37

Outline Geiselman (1999) study
What could this less accurate recall have been a result of?

Back 37

Difficulty understanding instructions

Front 38

Outline Geiselman (1999) study
On the basis of these findings, what age can CI be used effectively from?

Back 38

Aged eight and upwards

Front 39

In regards to reliability, what has the leading researcher in this field, Elizabeth Loftus shown about EWT?

Back 39

It often lacks reliability

Front 40

What are the factors that affect EWT accuracy?

Back 40

Anxiety, age of witness, misleading information individual differences and consequentiality

Front 41

Which of these factors can majorly affect accuracy?

Back 41

Misleading information given to witness subsequent to the event

Front 42

Which other two factors (not mentioned above) can also affect EWT accuracy?

Back 42

Previous knowledge and expectations

Front 43

Evaluation of CI
Why may the use of CI prove problematic and demanding with the interviewer?

Back 43

Interviewer must 'probe' and conduct interview effectively

Front 44

Evaluation of CI
Why is it difficult to evaluate the overall effectiveness of CI?

Back 44

Different police forces used different aspects

Front 45

Evaluation of CI
What are two criticisms of CI in regards to time and young children and their reliability in recall?

Back 45

1) Time-consuming
2) Young children have difficulty understanding instructions resulting in less reliable recall in comparison to SI

Front 46

Evaluation of CI
Legally, how is CI valuable and offer examples of where

Back 46

Valuable in reduction of miscarriages of justice in countries where this is likely to occur i.e. Brazil