Cognitive Interview

Cognitive Interview

The cognitive interview (CI) is a method of police questioning used for more effective memory recall in eyewitnesses of crime. The cognitive interview interviews eyewitnesses and victims to understand what they remember using specific strategies, including mental reinstatement, an in-depth report on everything, recollection of the incident in different orders, and recollection of the event from a different perspective.

Research suggested that traditional methods of police questioning negatively impacted the accuracy of eyewitnesses' memory recall. The unreliability of eyewitness testimony was also a concern in several aspects of memory recall.

Geiselman et al. (1985) created the cognitive interview technique in response to these issues. The technique uses four principles designed to enhance memory recall of eyewitness accounts using several memory retrieval methods.

The four principles of the cognitive interview technique are outlined below.

Mental Reinstatement

The technique starts by asking the eyewitness to recall the general surroundings and context of the crime. The interviewer may ask what the eyewitness was wearing, what they were thinking and how they felt. They may also ask about the weather and for accounts of the eyewitness' senses. Were there any memorable smells? Was the area well-lit? Did they hear any strange sounds?

This is used to help bring the eyewitness back to the environment and context of the crime, which may strengthen their recollection of the crime. This may also encourage the recollection of context-dependent memories. This technique is based on the principle of retrieval failure.

If a lady is an eyewitness to a crime in a café, she may report that on the day of the crime, she was excited to have coffee with her friend after a long time and was worried that she may need an umbrella because it looked like it could rain. She may also report smelling fresh bakery products coming out from the café kitchen. These are examples of details that could help mental reinstatement.

Fig. 1 - Law enforcement officer taking notes.

Report Everything

Eyewitnesses are asked to report every single detail, no matter how insignificant it may seem. This is because small pieces of information may lead to key information recall about the crime. This technique is also based on retrieval failure.

Recall the Incident in Different Orders

Eyewitnesses are asked to tell their accounts in a different order, such as backwards from the end of the crime to the beginning. In this way, people are less likely to use schema when recalling events to construct a story that makes sense. Another advantage if witnesses recall in reverse order is the recency effect which suggests that recall may be clearer for more recent events.

Recall from a Changed Perspective

Eyewitnesses are then asked to give an account of the crime from another perspective, such as the perspectives of other eyewitnesses. This also lessens the influence of schema.

The four principles above aim to use memory retrieval cues by recalling details of the context surrounding the crime. Geiselman stated that by recalling information from different contexts and perspectives, eyewitnesses can better cue a larger amount of accurate memories.

Cognitive Interview Model

The following two models provide clear examples of the cognitive interview technique.

Geiselman et al. (1985) Study

The study aimed to test the effectiveness of the cognitive interview technique in the memory recall of eyewitnesses. The researchers wanted to compare the efficiency of this technique to the standard interview and the hypnosis interview techniques.

Method

Eighty-nine participants were shown a video of a violent crime. Around 48 hours later, a law enforcement professional (policeman, private detective) used one of three different methods to interview the participants. These were:

• The cognitive interview technique.

• The standard interview technique used by Los Angeles police officers.

• The hypnosis interview technique.

The interviewers noted the number of facts recalled accurately, the number of inaccuracies and the number of made-up details by the participants.

Results and conclusion

Results showed that there was significantly more accurate memory recall from eyewitnesses with the cognitive interview and the hypnosis interview. Participants recalled a significantly higher number of correct facts using these methods; the standard interview technique produced the lowest number of accurately recalled facts.

However, even though these two techniques both resulted in more accurate eyewitness memory, the cognitive technique is easier to train law enforcement professionals in.

Cognitive Interview: Fisher et al. (1989)

The Fisher et al. (1989) study is a field experiment that tested the effectiveness of the cognitive interview technique. We will go through the aim, method, results and conclusions of the study.

Fig. 2 - Police officer in uniform.

Researchers aimed to test the effectiveness of the cognitive interview technique in real-life situations involving police officers.

Method

16 police detectives from Florida took part in this study. Detectives were first asked to record some interviews using their standard interview techniques. After this, seven police detectives were trained to implement the cognitive interview technique, while nine used the standard police interview technique. All detectives had a minimum of 5 years experience.

Over the next seven months, the interviews conducted by both groups were recorded and then analysed.

Results and Conclusion

The trained detectives obtained 47% more information from their interviewees after training. They gained 63% more information than their untrained counterparts.

The study showed strong support for using the cognitive interview technique in the practical field. There was also no loss of accuracy of information along with increased information obtained.

Advantages of the study include:

• High ecological validity as the study was conducted on actual police detectives.

• Ethical as the participants had been given full information about the study beforehand.

• Lack of experimenter bias as the results were analysed by those with no information about the conditions of the study.

• High in construct validity as the results of the study supported the use and effectiveness of the cognitive interview technique.

Disadvantages of the study include:

• Demand characteristics as the participants were paid for their participation; they may have acted in a way which they thought was desirable for the researcher.

• Ethnocentric as the study was conducted on police detectives in a Floridian county.

• Lack of generalisability due to small sample size.

Enhanced Cognitive Interview

In the early 1990s, researchers added to the cognitive interview, creating the enhanced cognitive interview (ECI). The ECI maintains the same principles as the cognitive interview technique; however, the ECI also examines how other social factors affect report accuracy.

A study found that witnesses' attitudes and motivations towards the interview affect the quality of their reporting. This includes how the witness perceives the appropriateness of the interview procedure.

It was found that the higher the perception of the interview appropriateness, the more detailed their reports and the better their attitude was towards being interviewed.

The ECI has been widely accepted as one of the most successful and effective techniques for enhancing eyewitnesses' memory recall.

Advantages of Cognitive Interview

There are several advantages of the cognitive interview technique, including:

• It serves as a more efficient method of memory recall and retrieval than in eyewitness testimony accounts.

• Its effectiveness is backed up by findings in the Geiselman et al. (1985) and Fisher et al. (1989) studies.

• Research has shown it works well with children. Holliday (2003) showed children aged 4-5 and 9-10 a video of a birthday party. The next day, they were interviewed about what they saw using a cognitive interview or standard interview. More correct details were obtained using the cognitive interview.

Cognitive Interview: Evaluation

Let’s evaluate the cognitive interview process by looking at its disadvantages as well. There are several disadvantages, including:

• The Geiselman et al. (1985) study has low ecological validity because the participants were shown a video of a violent crime and asked to recall the events. The study was not conducted in a real-life setting; this may undermine the validity of the cognitive interview technique.

• Conducting the cognitive interview itself may take longer as opposed to standard interview techniques that police are already trained and experienced in.

• Training police forces to implement this technique may take some time and be expensive.

• Some aspects of the interview technique may not yield as many results as the others.