Cognitive Interview
Cognitive Interview
Cognitive interview
Fisher and Geiselman in 1992 developed a technique called the cognitive interview which was based on psychological insights into how the memory works. They suggested that eyewitness testimony could be improved if the police used better techniques when interviewing witnesses.
​
They included four main techniques:
1. Report everything.
Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail that they can of the event that they have witnessed even though to them it may seem irrelevant. Sometimes trivial details are very important and can also trigger other important memories.
2. Reinstate the context.
This aspect of the cognitive interview requires the witness to return to the original crime scene in the mind. They are encouraged to imagine the environment at the time of the event, such as what the weather was like, as well as their emotions, (were they happy, sad, bored). This technique is linked to research into context dependent forgetting.
3. Reverse the order.
In this technique eyewitnesses are encouraged to recall the event in a different order from the original sequence. For example, they start at the final point in the memory and work back to the beginning. This helps to prevent people from reporting what they thought they saw which might be based on expectations rather than what they actually see (preexisting schema). Another strength of using reverse the order is that it prevents dishonesty as people find it more difficult to give an untruthful account if they have to reverse the order of the event.
4. Change perspective.
In this using this technique witnesses are asked to try and recall the incident that they have seen from another persons perspective. For example, they might be asked to recall the incident from the point of view of another eyewitness or even the perpetrator. This is also thought to disrupt the effect of expectations and schema on recall.
​
The Enhanced Cognitive Interview
Fisher in 1987 develop some additional elements of the cognitive interview which focuses mainly on the social dynamics of the interaction between the interviewer and the interviewee. For example, the interviewer might need social skills training to enhance the interaction between themselves and the interviewee. One important element might be eye contact, knowing when to give eye contact and when to relinquish it. The enhance cognitive interview aims to reduce the anxiety that an interviewee may feel whilst being interviewed.
​
Evaluation
1. One strength of the cognitive interview is that there is a wealth of evidence to support the effectiveness of the technique. For example, a meta-analysis was conducted by Kohnken et al in 1999 where they combined data from 55 studies comparing the cognitive interview and the enhanced cognitive interview with the standard police interview. They found that the cognitive interview led to an increase, on average, of 41% in accurate information compared with the standard interview. Out of the 55 studies only four of the studies showed that there was no difference between the types of interviews that were used. This suggests that the cognitive interview is an effective technique to help witnesses recall information.
​
2. One limitation of this meta-analysis by Kohnken et al was that they did find an increase in the amount of inaccurate information recalled by witnesses. They found that this was a particular issue when using the enhanced cognitive interview as this produced more inaccurate details than the cognitive interview. This means that police officers should treat eyewitness evidence obtained from the cognitive interview with caution.
​
3. Another limitation of the cognitive interview is that there are discrepancies in the effectiveness of the different elements of the interview. Milne and Bull in 2002 found that some of the techniques are more effective than others. For example, they found that a combination of report everything and reinstate the context led to better recall than any of the other elements. They also found that change perspective appears to be the least effective technique. Therefore this, doubt on the credibility of the use of the cognitive interview.
​
4. Another limitation of the cognitive interview is that it is very time-consuming. It is time-consuming as it takes more time to conduct the interview and to train police officers when compared to using the standard police interview. One element of the cognitive interview is the need to establish rapport in order to help the witness to relax, which takes time. Sometimes there are not enough resources to allow the cognitive interview to be used because of this. Therefore, it might not be a realistic method for police officers to use with their limited resources.
​
5. One strength of the cognitive interview is that police forces can use a pick and mix approach to using the techniques when interviewing. This means it is flexible, and individuals can focus on what approach appears to work best for them. However, this is a problem because it is then difficult to assess the effectiveness, of the cognitive interview because of the lack of consistency of use.