Authority Summary

EVALUATION: Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cognitive Interview

  • Overview of Cognitive Interview Effectiveness

    • Geiselman evaluated the effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview (CI).

    • Participants were shown police training videos and subsequently interviewed after 43 hours.

    • Results indicated comparative effectiveness between Standard Interview and Cognitive Interview techniques.

  • Correct and Incorrect Information Recalled

    • Cognitive Interview yields a significantly higher amount of correct information compared to Standard Interview.

    • Standard Interview:

      • Correctly recalled information: 29.4%

      • Incorrect information recalled: 41.8%

    • Cognitive Interview:

      • Correctly recalled information: 61%

      • Incorrect information recalled: Lower increase of approximately 20%.

    • Despite a trade-off where incorrect information increased, the CI shows a substantial advantage in correct recall.

  • Enhanced Cognitive Interview

    • The Enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI), developed by Fisher et al. in 1987, aims to improve upon the basic CI.

    • Key features include:

    • Use of open-ended questions (e.g., "What did the suspect do next?") instead of fixed-choice questions, which can lead to limited recall.

    • Encouragement for interviewers to follow the witness’ train of thought, questioning details as they emerge rather than waiting for their expected sequence.

    • Miami police reported a 46% increase in detail recall from witnesses trained under this method.

    • An assessment revealed that 90% of these details corresponded to correct information when cross-referenced with additional evidence (Fisher et al. 1990).

  • Analysis of Techniques

    • Not all techniques are equally effective; officers are advised to train only in the most effective methods.

    • Emphasis on quantity of information may come at the cost of quality; it does not guarantee accuracy.

    • Recollection is impacted by various factors such as surprise, anxiety, and the context in which the original memory was formed.

ANXIETY AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY (EWT)

  • Impact of Anxiety on EWT

    • Loftus & Burns (1982): Found that anxiety affects memory accuracy, illustrated through an experimental design involving a researcher versus a nurse in a medical setting.

    • Participants associated negative emotions with the nurse and performed poorly on identifying her compared to the researcher.

    • Peters highlighted that emotional experiences tied to anxiety had a substantial effect on memory recall.

  • Contradictory Findings

    • Some studies, such as Yuille & Cutshall, demonstrated that witnesses still provided accurate testimonies in high-stress situations (e.g., shooting incidents).

    • These reports suggest that high stress may have a positive effect on recall in certain high-stakes scenarios.

  • Yerkes-Dodson Law

    • The Law proposes that moderate anxiety can actually improve memory recall up to a certain point before performance declines with increasing stress (note: too much anxiety impairs memory).

    • Detail salience is pertinent where a weapon's presence, for example, shifts attention and affects peripheral detail recall.

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY

  • Overview of the Model

    • Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968): Proposed that memory consists of three separate but interconnected stores.

    • Sensory Memory (SM):

      • Holds large amounts of information for a very brief duration.

    • Short-Term Memory (STM):

      • Capacity: Typically around 7 (±2) items; duration is around 30 seconds.

      • STM utilizes processes like chunking for more efficient recall (Miller’s Law).

    • Long-Term Memory (LTM):

      • Capacity is potentially unlimited, storage is permanent (duration).

  • The Coding of Information

    • STM favors acoustic encoding over visual imagery for storage of information.

    • Research by Conrad supports the notion that errors in recall often occur due to phonetic similarities rather than visual representations.

    • In contrast, LTM appears to utilize semantic encoding, which organizes information based on meaning, proven through Klein's (1970) experiments on word recall.

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING

  • Interference Theory

    • Forgetting occurs due to interference from other memories.

    • Proactive Interference: Earlier learning interferes with the recall of later learning (e.g., old car controls affecting new car learning).

    • Retroactive Interference: New information disrupts the recall of previously learned material.

  • Retrieval Failure Theory

    • Proposes that forgetting is due to the absence of cues needed to access stored information.

    • Encoding specificity principle suggests memories are more easily retrieved if the retrieval context matches the encoding context.

WORKING MEMORY MODEL

  • Components of the Model

    • Proposed by Baddeley & Hitch (1974).

    • Central Executive:

    • Directs attention and coordinates information processing among the subsystems but has a limited capacity.

    • Phonological Loop: Handles auditory information; subdivided into the phonological store and articulatory rehearsal system.

    • Visuospatial Sketchpad: Manages visual and spatial information.

    • Episodic Buffer: Integrates information from different sources and organizes it into a coherent sequence.

COGNITIVE NEUROPSYCHOLOGY

  • Case Studies

    • Studies of individuals with brain injuries (e.g., amnesiacs) have provided insights into how different memory systems operate.

    • For instance, the case of patient HM shows that while short-term memory can function independently, long-term memory can be compromised if the hippocampus is damaged.

    • The distinction between STM and LTM is further supported by neuropsychological studies indicating different brain structures are active for different types of memory tasks.

    • Evidence from amnesics like KF also illustrates that there can be varied impacts on verbal versus visual memory systems.

LIMITATIONS AND EVALUATION OF MODELS

  • Limitations of the Multi-Store Model

    • The model may oversimplify memory processes, ignoring how information can be both stored and recalled in complex ways.

    • Evidence suggests that different types of long-term memory and coding processes exist that challenge the unidirectional flow proposed by the model.

  • Neuropsychological Evidence

    • Brain scanning studies underline the importance of the hippocampus in LTM formation and retrieval, while also indicating that other structures are involved in different memory functions.

    • Overall, models like MSM are continuously refined based on advancing neuropsychological evidence and broader understandings of cognitive mechanisms.