Producing facial composite sketches in remote Cognitive Interviews: A preliminary investigation

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 389-406

  Kuivaniemi Smith, Heidi J ^a   Nash, Robert A ^b   Brodie, Eleanor R ^b   Mahoney, Gregory ^a,c   Rynn, Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^c Boston Police Department Crime Laboratory Unit   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive Interviewing; eyewitness memory; face composite; sketch artist; video mediated communication

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897629685     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2013.793339     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Association of Chief Police Officers. (2009). Facial identification guidance 2009. Retrieved from http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/crime/2009/200911CRIFIG01.pdf
2. Brace, N. A., Pike, G. E., Allen, P., & Kemp, R. I. (2006). Identifying composites of famous faces: Investigating memory, language and system issues. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(4), 351-366. doi:10.1080/10683160500151159
3. Braun, S. (2011). Recommendations for the use of video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings. In S. Braun, & J. L. Taylor (Eds.), Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings (pp. 265-287). Guildford: University of Surrey.
4. Collins, R., Lincoln, R., & Frank, M. G. (2002). The effect of rapport in forensic interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology, & Law, 9(1), 69-78. doi:10.1375/pplt.2002.9.1.69
5. Council of the European Union. (2009). Videoconferencing as a part of European e-justice: The essentials of videoconferencing in cross-border court proceedings. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2860/3549
6. Czaja, S. J., Charness, N., Fisk, A. D., Hertzog, C., Nair, S. N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology & Aging, 21(2), 333-352. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333
7. Davies, G., & Valentine, T. (2007). Facial composites: Forensic utility and psychological research. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology. Volume II: Memory for people (pp. 59-83). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., McGorty, E. K., & Penrod, S. D. (2008). Forgetting the once-seen face: Estimating the strength of an eyewitness's memory representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(2), 139-150. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.14.2.139
9. Doherty-Sneddon, G., & McAuley, S. (2000). Influence of video-mediation on adult-child interviews: Implications for the use of the live link with child witnesses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14(4), 379-392. doi:10.1002/1099-0720(200007/08)14:4<379::AID-ACP664>3.0.CO;2-T
10. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.
11. Ellis, H. D., Shepherd, J. W., & Davies, G. M. (1980). Deterioration of verbal descriptions of faces over different delay intervals. Journal of Police Science & Administration, 8, 101-106.
12. Fisher, R., & Geiselman, E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield: Charles Thomas.
13. Frowd, C., Bruce, V., & Hancock, P. J. B. (2008). Changing the face of criminal identification. Psychologist, 21, 668-672. Retrieved from www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm/volumeID_21-editionID_163-ArticleID_1381-getfile_getPDF/thepsychologist%5C0808frowd.pdf.
14. Frowd, C. D., Bruce, V., Smith, A. J., & Hancock, P. J. B. (2008). Improving the quality of facial composites using a holistic cognitive interview. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(3), 276-287. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.14.3.276
15. Frowd, C. D., Carson, D., Ness, H., McQuiston-Surrett, D., Richardson, J., Baldwin, H., Hancock, P. (2005). Contemporary composite techniques: The impact of a forensically-relevant target delay. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 10(1), 63-81. doi:10.1348/135532504X15358
16. Fullwood, C. (2007). The effect of mediation on impression formation: A comparison of face-to-face and video-mediated conditions. Applied Ergonomics, 38(3), 267-273. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2006.06.002
17. Fullwood, C., & Finn, M. (2010). Video-mediated communication and impression formation: An integrative review. In A. C. Rayler (Ed.), Videoconferencing: Technology, impact, and applications (pp. 35-55). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
18. Gabbert, F., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2009). Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. Law & Human Behavior, 33(4), 298-307. doi:10.1007/s10979-008-9146-8
19. Glenberg, A. M., Schroeder, J. L., & Robertson, D. A. (1998). Averting the gaze disengages the environment and facilitates remembering. Memory & Cognition, 26(4), 651-658. doi:10.3758/BF03211385
20. Hope, L., Gabbert, F., & Fisher, R. P. (2011). From laboratory to the street: Capturing witness memory using the Self-Administered Interview. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 16(2), 211-226. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02015.x
21. Johnson, M. T., & Wiggins, E. C. (2006). Videoconferencing in criminal proceedings: Legal and empirical issues and directions for research. Law & Policy, 28(2), 211-227. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9930.2006.00224.x
22. Köhnken, G., Milne, R., Memon, A., & Bull, R. (1999). The Cognitive Interview: A meta-analysis. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5(1-2), 3-27.
23. Memon, A., Meissner, C. A., & Fraser, J. (2010). The Cognitive Interview: A meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 16, 340-372. doi:10.1037/a0020518
24. McQuiston-Surrett, D., Topp, L. D., & Malpass, R. S. (2006). Use of facial composite systems in US law enforcement agencies. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(5), 505-517. doi:10.1080/10683160500254904
25. Minear, M., & Park, D. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 630-633. doi:10.3758/BF03206543
26. Mitchell, J. E., Crosby, R. D., Wonderlich, S. A., Crow, S., Lancaster, K., Simonich, H., Myers, T. C. (2008). A randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for bulimia nervosa delivered via telemedicine versus face-to-face. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46(5), 581-592. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2008.02.004
27. Morsella, E., & Krauss, R. M. (2004). The role of gestures in spatial working memory and speech. American Journal of Psychology, 117(3), 411-424. doi:10.2307/4149008
28. Nash, R. A., Houston, K. A., Ryan, K., & Woodger, N. (2013). Remembering remotely: Would video-mediation impair witnesses' memory reports? Manuscript submitted for publication.
29. O'Conaill, B., Whittaker, S., & Wilbur, S. (1993). Conversations over video conferences: An evaluation of the spoken aspects of video-mediated communication. Human-Computer Interaction, 8, 389-428. doi:10.1207/s15327051hci0804_4
30. O'Malley, C., Langton, S., Anderson, A., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Bruce, V. (1996). Comparison of face-to-face and video-mediated interaction. Interacting with Computers, 8(2), 177-192. doi:10.1016/0953-5438(96)01027-2
31. Perfect, T. J., Wagstaff, G. F., Moore, D., Andrews, B., Cleveland, V., Newcombe, S., Brown, L. (2008). How can we help witnesses to remember more? It's an (eyes) open and shut case. Law & Human Behavior, 32(4), 314-324. doi:10.1007/s10979-007-9109-5
32. Poulin, A. B. (2004). Criminal justice and videoconferencing technology: The remote defendant. Tulane Law Review, 78, 1089-1167.
33. Richardson, J., Stahl, D., Deal, M., & Lowe, S.2010). Standards and guidelines for forensic art and facial identification. Retrieved from https://www.theiai.org/disciplines/art/ForensicArtGuidelinesSGFAFI1stEd.pdf
34. Schooler, J. W., & Engstler-Schooler, T. Y. (1990). Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid. Cognitive Psychology, 22(1), 36-71. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(90)90003-M
35. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100(2), 139-156. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.100.2.139
36. Shepherd, J. W., Gibling, F., & Ellis, H. D. (1991). The effects of distinctiveness, presentation time and delay on face recognition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 3(1), 137-145. doi:10.1080/09541449108406223
37. Storck, J., & Sproull, L. (1995). Through a glass darkly: What do people learn in videoconferences? Human Communication Research, 22(2), 197-219. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1995.tb00366.x
38. Straus, S. G., Miles, J. A., & Levesque, L. L. (2001). The effects of videoconference, telephone, and face-to-face media on interviewer and applicant judgments in employment interviews. Journal of Management, 27, 363-381. doi:10.1177/014920630102700308
39. Vallano, J. P., & Schreiber Compo, N. (2011). A comfortable witness is a good witness: Rapport-building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock-crime interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 960-970. doi:10.1002/acp.1789
40. Zajac, R., & Henderson, N. (2009). Don't it make my brown eyes blue: Co-witness misinformation about a target's appearance can impair target-absent line-up performance. Memory, 17(3), 266-278. doi:10.1080/09658210802623950