Features of cognitive interview
Context reinstatement - Cues in order to set the scene to eyewitness
Perspective change - Describing the scene from another eyewitness' perspective
"Report everything" - Saying every insignificant detail
Recalling events in different order - Asking questions which led up to the event in a different order
Evidence Geiselman et al (1985)
Investigated the effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview
Participants viewed a film of violent crime. After 48hrs they were interviewed by either cognitive interview or a standard interview used by police or an interview using hypnosis.
Correctly called facts :There was no significant differences.
Cognitive 41.2 = improves memory. Participants are less likely to be misled by false information Hypnosis 38.0 Standard 29.4
A02 - Not 100% reliable - Contamination. low ecological validity (video, neglects emotion) Protection from harm :). Demand characteristic, participants knew they would be asked about the video.
Analysis and A02 of the Cognitive Interview.
Interviewers should tailor their language to suit witness' ie- children.
Judgemental comments should be avoided
Should review eye witness' descriptions
Overall cognitive interview improves recall, as seen in the study by Geiselman et al. However it does have its weakness'.
Less effective in young children
How soon the person is interviewed
Does not improve person identifcation in line ups.