1999•Perceptual and Motor SkillsRequires access

Earwitness Recall and Identification: Comparison of the Cognitive Interview and the Structured Interview

Amina Memon, A. Daniel Yarmey

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

77 undergraduates instructed to act as kidnap victims heard taped instructions given by a mock abductor. Two days later witnesses' recall of the culprit's monologue was tested using either a Cognitive Interview or a Structured Interview. Participants then rated the abductor's voice for nine speech characteristics and attempted to identify his voice from an audiotaped lineup. No significant differences were found between the two interview conditions for accuracy or error rates in free recall, for ratings of descriptive voice characteristics, or for performance in voice identification. These earwitness results are consistent with eyewitness investigations which have yielded no positive influence of the cognitive interview on identification. It is concluded that the success of the cognitive interview is best explained through its influence on social components of interviewing.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

77 undergraduates instructed to act as kidnap victims heard taped instructions given by a mock abductor. Two days later witnesses' recall of the culprit's monologue was tested using either a Cognitive Interview or a Structured Interview. Participants then rated the abductor's voice for nine speech characteristics and attempted to identify his voice from an audiotaped lineup. No significant differences were found between the two interview conditions for accuracy or error rates in free recall, for ratings of descriptive voice characteristics, or for performance in voice identification. These earwitness results are consistent with eyewitness investigations which have yielded no positive influence of the cognitive interview on identification. It is concluded that the success of the cognitive interview is best explained through its influence on social components of interviewing.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

77 undergraduates instructed to act as kidnap victims heard taped instructions given by a mock abductor. Two days later witnesses' recall of the culprit's monologue was tested using either a Cognitive Interview or a Structured Interview. Participants then rated the abductor's voice for nine speech characteristics and attempted to identify his voice from an audiotaped lineup. No significant differences were found between the two interview conditions for accuracy or error rates in free recall, for ratings of descriptive voice characteristics, or for performance in voice identification. These earwitness results are consistent with eyewitness investigations which have yielded no positive influence of the cognitive interview on identification. It is concluded that the success of the cognitive interview is best explained through its influence on social components of interviewing.

Key concepts: Cognitive interview, Interview, Psychology, Recall, Cognition, Identification (biology), Free recall, Clinical psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Earwitness Recall and Identification: Comparison of the Cognitive Interview and the Structured Interview — Research Paper | ScholarLens