Improving accuracy of eyewitness testimony: The cognitive interview

What is the standard interview?

The typical way a detective would interview a witness.

Doesn’t get the best accuracy of EWT.

Why was the cognitive interview designed?

Used in police interviews involving witnesses.

Was designed to improve on the standard interview with the aim to improve accuracy of EWT and enhance retrieval of information from the witness’ memory.

Psychological research was applied to this, particularly Elizabeth Loftus’ work.

What are the problems with the standard interview?

Quick, direct questions - increase witness stress

Often interruptions - witnesses lose track of thought

Often leading questions

Detective decides what info is important, may leave details out

Ultimately leads to inaccurate info

Who developed the cognitive interview?

Geiselman (1984)

His cognitive interview was based on 4 distinct components.

What were the 4 components?

1. Mental reinstatement of original context

2. Reporting every detail

3. Changing order of events

4. Changing perspective

Explain mental reinstatement of original context

The witness is told to mentally recreate both the physical and psychological environment of the crime.

This includes senses, weather, feelings and mental state.

How does mental reinstatement of the original context enhance memory retrieval?

Encoding specificity principle - same context = better memory

Retrieval cues help remembrance and make memories accessible

Explain reporting everything

The interviewer encourages the witness to report every single detail of the event - including information they deem as irrelevant.

How does reporting everything enhance memory retrieval?

Witnesses may recall events that they thought were irrelevant but are actually crucial evidence

Also, the recollection of one item may then cue more memories.

Explain changing order

The interviewer may ask the witness to reverse the order in which events occurred.

How does changing the order of events enhance memory retrieval?

This removes false memories that the brain already makes in order to fill in gaps.

This is because of schemas - these may influence memory because of expectations of things that may happen.

Changing the order of events eliminates these.

Explain changing perspective

The witness is told to imagine the incident from different perspectives.

Eg from the perpetrator, other witnesses

How does changing perspective enhance memory retrieval?

This is again done to cancel out schemas’ influence on memory and to reduce bias.

Positive eval

Research support for the CI - Köhnken (199) conducted a meta-analysis of 53 studies. He found an increase of 34% in the amount of correct information generated in the cognitive interview compared to the standard interview

Negative eval

Quantity over quality - Köhnken (1999) found that the CI massively increases quantity, but this has also resulted in some inaccurate memories being recalled. Köhnken found an 81% increase in correct information but also a 61% increase in incorrect information. So the CI doesn’t guarantee accuracy.

Impractical - the CI requires a very large amount of time to conduct, some police officers can’t be bothered so may slack. Also it requires special training to be conducted correctly. These problems were pointed out by Kebbell and Wagstaff (1996).

Individual differences - the CI has been found to be more effective in interviewing older people compared to younger people.