Amina Memon (1996) Evidence on the Remember/know Status of Errors
. Psycoloquy: 7(19) Witness Memory (6)
Versions: ASCII formatted
Psycoloquy 7(19): Evidence on the Remember/know Status of Errors
EVIDENCE ON THE REMEMBER/KNOW STATUS OF ERRORS
Reply to Higham & Roberts on Witness-Memory
Amina Memon
School of Human Development
University of Texas at Dallas
Box 830688 (GR 4.1)
Richardson, TX 75083-0688
Sarah V Stevenage
Department of Psychology
University of Southampton
Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ
amemon@utdallas.edu
svs1@psy.soton.ac.uk
Abstract
In their commentary, Higham & Roberts argue that the
increased errors that emerge when using the cognitive interview
(CI) may be reduced by taking account of whether the witness
"remembers" a detail or merely "knows" it. In this reply we discuss
evidence from Bekerian and Dennett (1994) which addresses this
issue directly. Their results would suggest that, contrary to
Higham & Roberts' suggestion, the errors in recall are not
characterised by a "know" status.
Keywords
Cognitive interview, errors, eyewitness memory,
facilitated recall, police procedures, questioning, recovered
memories, structured interview.
References
- Bekerian, D.A. & Dennett, J.L. (1994). The fate of errors produced under the Cognitive Interview. Paper presented at the Practical Aspects of Memory Conference, Maryland, July.
- Higham, P.A. & Roberts, W.T. (1996). Analyzing States of Consciousness During Retrieval as a Way to Improve the Cognitive Interview. PSYCOLOQUY 7(6) witness-memory.4.higham.
- Memon, A. & Stevenage, S. (1996). Interviewing Witnesses: What Works and What Doesn't? PSYCOLOQUY 7(6) witness-memory.1.memon.