The cognitive interview

The cognitive interview

1. Geiselman et al (1984)

   • 1) Mental reinstatement of original context
     • interviewee is encouraged to mentally recreate the physically & psychological environment of the original incident
   • 2) Report everything
     • the interviewee is encouraged to report every single detail of the event, without editing anything out
   • 3) Change order
     • the interviewee is asked to consider an alternative timeline of the incident e.g. reversing the order
   • 4) Change perspective
     • the interviewee is asked to recall the incident from another perspective

2. what interviewer might say

   • 1) think back to the day, what were you doing, get picture in your mind
   • 2) don't hold back info everything is important
   • 3) I would like you to start from the end to the start
   • 4) to recall the incident from the perspective of another person involved

3. Evaluation

   • Research support
     • Kohnken et al (1999) meta analysis of 53 studies found increase of 34% correct info using CI
     • may be due to individual elements of CI rather than whole process
     • suggest CI is an effective technique
   • quantity increased not quality
     • Kohnken et al (1999) 81% increase in correct info generated but 61% increase in incorrect info when using enhanced CI
     • however procedure is used to enhance quantity without compromising quality
     • only useful to increase quantity of info police should treat info found with CI with caution
   • time taken & training required for police
     • Kebbel & Wagstaff 2 issues: takes more time than available & requires special training
     • unfortunately, police usually use deliberate strategies to minimise time & most forces have not provided necessary training
     • these limitations have prevented application of CI to everyday police interviews
   • difficulty establishing effectiveness
     • when CI used in real world not just one procedure collection of related techniques
     • e.g. Thames valley police use version doesn't include changing perspectives
     • matters as difficult to identify which components of CI are effective & increase quantity & quality of info produced
   • differences in old VS. young people
     • Mello & Fisher (1996) found that CI produced significantly more info for older participants
     • may be as older adults are overly cautious about reporting info & CI places importance on this
     • suggests CI is more effective for older people in comparison to younger people