term1 Definition1term2 Definition2term3 Definition3
Please sign in to your Google account to access your documents:
1. Context Reinstatement
2. Report Everything
3. Recall From Changed Perspective
4. Recall in Reverse Order
Context Reinstatement
Describe the instructions to the witness and why it works.
Instructions
- Interviewee needs to be returned, in their mind to the situation in which it occurred (context).
- Need to mentally recreate the external environment & how they were feeling, during & after event.
Why It Works
- Mental consistency between actual incident & recreated situations (cues) = increased likeliness they will recall more accurately.
Report Everything
- Report every detail about event even if it seems irrelevant (no bearing on a crime)
- Unrestrained recall might throw up details that otherwise might have been inadvertently mentally 'edited out'.
- Interviewer's responsibility to decide what is important.
Recall From Changed Perspective
- Mentally recreate situation from a different perspective.
- Info observed can be retrieved through a variety of 'routes' therefore = more effective.
Recall in Reversed Order
- Start w/ an aspect of scene which is most memorable & work backwards from that point.
- Prevents use of schemas: mental short cuts as to what should happen instead make the witness think about what did happen.
1. S - Free Recall/ CI - Clear order for interviewee to build a picture.
2. S - Possible Leading Questions/ CI - Less susceptible to leading questions.
3. S - Possible less accurate info produced/ CI - More forensically rich detail.
4. S - Easier & less time/ CI - Extended training & lengthy process.
5. S - Cold Answers/ CI - Answers in context
1. Recall
2. Leading Questions
3. Accuracy
4. Time
5. Type of answers.
- Milne & Bull found that each individual element was equally valuable.
- Each technique used singly produced more info than the Standard interview.
- However, combo of Report Everything & Context Reinstatement produced better recall than any other conditions.
- Strength = @least these 2 elements should be used to improve police interviewing even if full CI isn't used.
- Milne & Bull found what about each individual element?
- And produced more...
- Combo of which elements produced better recall than other conditions?
- Why is it a strength,even if full CI isn't used?
Strength of Cognitive Interview (in comparison to standard): There is Support For the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview.
- Geiselman et al showed pp's police training vids of simulated violent crimes
- 48 hrs later they were interviewed about the films y an experienced Los Angeles police officer using the conditions; cognitive interview, standard police interview, or an interview using hypnosis.
- Found that cognitive interview elicited the most accurate recall, followed by hypnosis & then standard interview.
- Strength b/c clearly demonstrates how CI can be used to enhance recall.
- What did Geiselman et al show pp's vids of?
- 48 hrs later they were interviewed by who?
- What were the 3 different conditions?
- What did he find?
- Why is this a strength?
- Police may be reluctant use CI b/c it takes more time than the standard police interview.
- E.G - Time is needed to establish rapport w/ a witness & allow them to relax.
- CI also requires special training & many police forces have not been able to provide more than a few hrs of training.
- Limitation b/c police forces may not carry out a complete CI = affecting how effective it is.
- Why may police be reluctant to use CI?
- What is time needed for in the interview?
- What do police officers need to be able to complete CI, which many police forces haven't been able to provide?
- Why is this a limitation?
Need help typing ? See our FAQ (opens in new window)
Please sign in to create this set. We'll bring you back here when you are done.
Discard Changes Sign in
Please sign in to add to folders.
Sign in
Don't have an account? Sign Up »
You have created 2 folders. Please upgrade to Cram Premium to create hundreds of folders!