The cognitive interview and its effect on misleading postevent information

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 669-683

  Centofanti, Antoni T ^a   Reece, John ^a  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cognitive interview; Eyewitness memory; Misinformation effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750898807     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160600558394     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Bekerian, D. A., & Bowers, J. M. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we misled? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 139-145.
2. Belli, R. F. (1989). Influences of misleading postevent information: Misinformation interference and acceptance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 72-85.
3. Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1993). Suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403-439.
4. Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children's testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Society.
5. Chandler, C. C. (1989). Specific retroactive interference in modified recognition tests: Evidence for the unknown cause of interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 256-265.
6. Chandler, C. C. (1991). How memory for an event is influenced by related events: Interference in modified recognition tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 115-125.
7. Fisher, R. P. (1996). Misconceptions in design and analysis of research with the cognitive interview. PSYCOLOQUY, 7(35) witness-memory.12.fisher.
8. Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
9. Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Amador, M. (1989). Field test of the cognitive interview: Enhancing the recollection of actual victims and witnesses of crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 722-727.
10. Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Raymond, D. (1987). Critical analysis of police interview techniques. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 177-185.
11. Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., Raymond, D., Jurkevich, L., & Warhaftig, M. (1987). Enhancing enhanced eyewitness memory: Refining the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 291-296.
12. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., Cohen, G., Holland, H., & Surtes, L. (1986). Eyewitness responses to leading and misleading questions under the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 14, 31-39.
13. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., Firstenberg, I., Hutton, L. A., Sullivan, S., Avetissian, I., & Prosk, A. (1984). Enhancement of eyewitness memory: An empirical evaluation of the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 12, 74-80.
14. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., MacKinnon, D. P., & Holland, H. L. (1985). Eyewitness memory enhancement in the police interview: Cognitive retrieval mnemonics versus hypnosis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 401-412.
15. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., MacKinnon, D. P., & Holland, H. L. (1986). Enhancement of eyewitness memory with the cognitive interview. American Journal of Psychology, 99, 385-401.
16. Gibling, F., & Davies, G. (1988). Reinstatement of context following exposure to postevent information. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 129-141.
17. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Clark, N. K. (1986). Suggestibility in police interrogation: A social psychological model. Social Behaviour, 1, 83-104.
18. Gwyer, P., & Clifford, B. R. (1997). The effects of the cognitive interview on recall, identification, confidence and the confidence/accuracy relationship. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 121-145.
19. Hayes, B. K., & Delamonthe, K. (1997). Cognitive interviewing procedures and suggestibility in children's recall. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 562-577.
20. Holliday, R. E. (2003). The effect of a prior cognitive interview on children's acceptance of misinformation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 443-457.
21. Holliday, R. E., & Albon, A. J. (2004). Minimising misinformation effects in young children with cognitive interview mnemonics. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 263-281.
22. Holliday, R. E., & Hayes, B. K. (2000). Dissociating automatic and intentional processes in children's eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 75, 1-42.
23. Holliday, R. E., Reyna, V. F., & Hayes, B. K. (2002). Memory processes underlying misinformation effects in child witnesses. Developmental Review, 22, 37-77.
24. Kebbell, M., & Wagstaff, G. (1998). Hypnotic interviewing: The best way to interview eyewitnesses? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 16, 115-129.
25. Kohnken, G., Schimossek, E., Aschermann, E., & Hofer, E. (1995). The cognitive interview and the assessment of the credibility of adults' statements. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 671-684.
26. Kohnken, G., Milne, R., Memon, A., & Bull, R. (1999). The cognitive interview: A meta-analysis. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 3-27.
27. Lindsay, S. D. (1990). Misleading suggestions can impair eyewitnesses' ability to remember event details. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1077-1083.
28. Lindsay, D. S., Gonzales, V., & Eso, K. (1995). Aware and unaware uses of memories of postevent suggestions. In M. Zaragoza, J. Graham, G. Hall, R. Hirschman, & Y. Ben-Porath (Eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness. Cambridge, MA: Sage.
29. Lindsay, D. S., & Johnson, M. K. (1989). Eyewitness suggestibility and memory for source. Memory and Cognition, 17, 349-358.
30. Loftus, E. F. (1979). Eyewitness memory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Loftus, E. F., & Hoffman, H. (1989). Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 100-104.
32. Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., & Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 19-31.
33. Mantwill, M., Kohnken, G., & Aschermann, E. (1995). Effects of the cognitive interview on the recall of familiar and unfamiliar events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 68-78.
34. McCloskey, M., & Zaragoza, M. S. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1-16.
35. McSpadden, M. D., Schooler, J. W., & Loftus, E. F. (1988). Here today, gone tomorrow: The appearance and disappearance of context effects. In G. M. Davies, & D. M. Thomson (Eds.), Memory in context: Context in memory. Chichester: Wiley.
36. Memon, A., Cronin, O., Eaves, R., & Bull, R. (1993). The cognitive interview and child witnesses. Issues in Criminological and Legal Psychology, 20, 3-9.
37. Memon, A., & Higham, P. A. (1999). A review of the cognitive interview. Psychology. Crime & Law, 5, 177-196.
38. Memon, A., Holley, A., Milne, R., Kohnken, G., & Bull, R. (1994). Towards understanding the effects of interviewer training in evaluating the cognitive interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 641-659.
39. Memon, A., Holley, A., Wark, L., Bull, R., & Kohnken, G. (1996). Reducing suggestibility in child witness interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 503-518.
40. Memon, A., & Stevenage, S. V. (1996a). Interviewing eyewitnesses: What works and what doesn't? PSYCOLOQUY 7(6) witness-memory.1.memon.
41. Memon, A., & Stevenage, S. V. (1996b). A clarification of the importance of comparison groups and accuracy rates with the cognitive interview. Reply to Fisher on witness-memory. PSYCOLOQUY 7(41) witness-memory. 14.memon.
42. Memon, A., Wark, L., Holley, A., Bull, R., & Kohnken, G. (1997). Eyewitness performance in cognitive and structured interviews. Memory, 5, 639-655.
43. Memon, A., Wark, L., Bull, R., & Kohnken, G. (1997). Isolating the effects of the cognitive interview techniques. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 179-197.
44. Milne, R., & Bull, R. (1996). Interviewing children with mild learning disability with the cognitive interview. In N. K. Clark, & G. M. Stephenson (Eds.), Investigative and forensic decision making. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
45. Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2002). Back to basics: A componential analysis of the original cognitive interview mnemonics with three age groups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 743-753.
46. Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2003). Does the cognitive interview help children to resist the effects of suggestive questioning? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 8, 21-38.
47. Milne, R., Clare, I., & Bull, R. (1999). Applying the cognitive interview for use with adults with mild learning disability. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 81-99.
48. Milne, R., Bull, R., Kohnken, G., & Memon, A. (1995). The cognitive interview and suggestibility. Issues in Criminological and Legal Psychology, 22, 21-27.
49. Roediger, H. L., III, & Guynn, M. J. (1996). Retrieval processes. In E. L. Bjork, & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Memory. San Diego: Academic Press.
50. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2000). Using multivariate statistics (4th edn). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
51. Thompson, B. (2002). "Statistical", "practical" and "clinical": How many kinds of significance do counsellors need to consider. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80, 64-71.
52. Tversky, B., & Tuchin, M. (1989). A reconciliation of the evidence on eyewitness testimony: Comments on McCloskey and Zaragoza (1985). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 86-91.
53. Tulving, E. (1974). Cue dependent forgetting. American Scientist, 62, 74-82.
54. Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
55. Wells, G. L., Olson, E. A., & Charman, S. D. (2002). The confidence of eyewitnesses in their identifications from lineups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 151-154.
56. Zaragoza, M. S. (1991). Preschool children's susceptibility to memory impairment. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections: Implications for eyewitness testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.