interviewing the witness

interviewing the witness

1. standard police interview needs to gain accurate and useful information from EW, these supposedly are the central leads within an investigation

   • the problems with current police interviews;
     • fisher et al (1987) field study of experienced detective interviews
       • interrupted after mean 7.5 secs
         • unstructured
           • closed questions (av; 3 open, 26 closed)
       • not based on mental representations and many misleading questions were asked

2. Geiselman et al (1984) developed the CI which aims to inc quality & quantity info

   • uses psycholoigcal principles about memory
     • 4 instructions
       • report everything
       • context reinstatement
       • change order
       • change perspective
     • based on Tulvings pricniple of specifity whereby during retrieval processes can create new retrieval pathways

3. LIMITATION of CI; other factors may affects retrieval such as role in event and anxiety

   • ECI developed; CI not structured so sequencing of questions were not good
     • 7 phases in ECI
       • establish raport, social communication skills, transfer control, focused retrieval, no interrupting, open ended qu
         • Geiselman et al (1984);
           • 16 pps live staged event; CI more correct SI
         • Geiselman et al (1985)
           • 89 pps-CI V SI V hypno (CI & HYP INC COR)
         • Geiselman et al (1986); same results non student pop
         • Fisher et al (1989)
           • ECI real witnesses; 47% more correct info, high collob rates

4. META ANALYSIS (Koehken et al, 2008) 55 exp comp;

   • CI inc correct details than SI
   • Mantwill et al-less correct items (CI) method int-written report not good

5. Police percieve Ci useful (Longford (1996), reasons not using logic

   • Kebbell et al CI time consuming
   • Croft (1995) use CI in serious offense

6. PEACE TRAINING

   • CI training in tier 1
     • Dando et al (2009) 48 police int 48 mock witnesses. no used CI fully. free recall with frew interrup
       • rapoort-1/2
         • RE used 5/48, 1/2 said tell me everything rememeber
         • CR 3/48 attempted by 10

7. CI need all 4 instructions?

   • Geiselman et al (1986)
     • CR & RE v SI V CI- CR & RE BETTER SI, CI BETTER CR & RE
   • Boon & Noon (1994)
     • CP not inc recall
     • not compare each condition with control
   • Memon et al (1996)
     • re, cp, ro no dif in effec
       • no full CI compare to
   • davies et al (2004)
     • ECI V MCI V SI (MCI-CO & CP OMIT)
       • mci & eci no signfic dif no. correct detail recalled