Amina Memon (1996) A Clarification of the Importance of Comparison Groups
. Psycoloquy: 7(41) Witness Memory (14)
Versions: ASCII formatted
Psycoloquy 7(41): A Clarification of the Importance of Comparison Groups
A CLARIFICATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPARISON GROUPS
AND ACCURACY RATES WITH THE COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
Reply to Fisher on Witness-Memory
Amina Memon
School of Human Development
University of Texas at Dallas
Box 830688 (GR 4.1)
Richardson, TX 75083-0688
USA
Sarah V Stevenage
Department of Psychology
University of Southampton
Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ
England
amemon@utdallas.edu
svs1@psy.soton.ac.uk
Abstract
Fisher's (1996) commentary on the target article by Memon
and Stevenage (1996) has raised two very important issues. The
first concerns the suitability of the structured interview (SI) as
a comparison group for the assessment of the cognitive interview
(CI). The second issue concerns the relative importance of the
absolute number of errors versus the error rate when discussing the
accuracy of information elicited using the CI. We would like to
take this opportunity to clarify our position on these two points.
Keywords
Cognitive interview, errors, eyewitness memory,
facilitated recall, police procedures, questioning, recovered
memories, structured interview.
References
- Bull, R. & Cherryman, J. (1996). Helping to identify skill gaps in specialist investigative interviewing: Enhancement of professional skills. Final Report to the Home Office Police Research Group, London: HMSO.
- Fisher, R.P. (1996). Misconceptions in Design and Analysis of Research With the Cognitive Interview. PSYCOLOQUY 7(35) witness-memory.12.fisher.
- Fisher, R.P. & Geiselman, R.E. (1992). Memory enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The Cognitive Interview. Springfield III: Charles C Thomas.
- 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(5), 722-727.
- Geiselman, R.E. (1996). On the Use and Efficacy of the Cognitive Interview. PSYCOLOQUY 7(11) witness-memory.2.geiselman.
- Kebbell, M.R. & Wagstaff, G.F. (1996). Enhancing the Practicality of the Cognitive Interview in Forensic Situations: Commentary on Memon and Stevenage. PSYCOLOQUY 7(16) witness-memory.3.kebbell.
- Memon, A., Holley, A., Wark, L., Bull, R. & Koehnken, G. (1996a). Reducing suggestibility in child witness interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 416-432.
- Memon, A., Milne, R., Holley, A., Koehnken, G. & Bull, R. (1994). Towards understanding the effects of interviewer training in evaluating the cognitive interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 641-59.
- Memon, A. & Stevenage, S.V. (1996). Interviewing Witnesses: What Works and What Doesn't. PSYCOLOQUY 7(6) witness-memory.1.memon.
- Memon, A. & Stevenage, S.V. (1996b). The Cognitive Interview in a Broader Context: Reply to Geiselman on Witness-Memory. PSYCOLOQUY 7(22) witness-memory.8.memon.
- Memon, A., Wark, L., Holley, A., Bull, R. & Koehnken, G. (1996b). Interviewer behaviour in investigative interviews. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, pp. 181-201.
- Memon, A., Wark, L., Bull, R. & Koehnken, G. (in press). Isolating the effect of the cognitive interview techniques. British Journal of Psychology.
- Shepherd, E. (1988). Developing interview skills. In, New Directions in Police Training, P. Southgate (Ed.), London: HMSO.
- Turtle, J. (1995, July). Officers: What do they want? What have we got? Paper presented at the 1st biennial meeting of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, University of British Columbia.
- Yuille, J.C., Hunter, R., Joffe, R. & Zaparniuk, J. (1993). Interviewing children in sex abuse cases. In G. Goodman & B. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving children's testimony: Clinical, developmental and legal implications (pp. 95-115). New York: Guilford Press.