The Cognitive Interview

The cognitive interview (CI) was developed by Fisher and Geiselman (1992) as an improved technique for interviewing eyewitnesses. It was designed to increase the accuracy and amount of information recalled by witnesses, based on psychological research into how memory works.

---

Why Was the Cognitive Interview Developed?

Traditional police interviews often involved:

• Closed questions that limited the witness's responses
• Leading questions that could distort memories (as shown by Loftus and Palmer)
• Interruptions that broke the witness's concentration
• A focus on getting a specific narrative rather than allowing the witness to recall freely

These practices could reduce the accuracy and completeness of witness statements. The cognitive interview was designed to address these problems by using techniques grounded in psychological research on memory.

---

The Four Techniques of the Cognitive Interview

The CI consists of four main techniques:

flowchart TD
    A[Cognitive Interview] --> B["1 Mental Reinstatement<br/>of Context"]
    A --> C[2 Report Everything]
    A --> D[3 Changed Perspective]
    A --> E[4 Reverse Order]
    B --> F["Provides retrieval cues<br/>encoding specificity"]
    C --> G["Trivial details may<br/>cue further recall"]
    D --> H["Disrupts schema-driven<br/>filling of gaps"]
    E --> I["Disrupts expected<br/>narrative order"]

1. Mental Reinstatement of Context

The witness is asked to mentally recreate the context of the original event — the environment, their emotional state, and what they were thinking and feeling at the time.

Psychological basis: This is based on the encoding specificity principle (Tulving, 1983) and research on context-dependent memory (Godden and Baddeley, 1975). By mentally recreating the context at encoding, the witness provides themselves with retrieval cues that may trigger memories that would otherwise not be recalled.

2. Report Everything

The witness is encouraged to report every single detail they can remember, even if it seems irrelevant, trivial, or incomplete. They should not edit or hold back any information.

Psychological basis: Some details that seem unimportant to the witness may be important to the investigation. Also, recalling small details can serve as retrieval cues that trigger recall of other, more significant information.

3. Recall from a Changed Perspective

The witness is asked to try to recall the event from a different perspective — for example, from the point of view of another person who was present, or from a different position in the room.

Psychological basis: This technique is designed to reduce the effects of schemas and expectations on recall. When we recall events from our own perspective, we tend to fill in gaps with what we would expect to have happened. Changing perspective disrupts this and may help access details that were overlooked.

4. Recall in Reverse Order

The witness is asked to recall the event in different temporal orders — for example, starting from the end and working backwards, or starting from the middle.

Psychological basis: When people recall events in the normal forward order, they tend to use their schemas (expectations about how events usually unfold) to fill in gaps. Recalling in reverse order disrupts this schema-driven recall and may help the witness report what actually happened rather than what they expected to happen.

---

The Enhanced Cognitive Interview

Fisher and Geiselman later developed the enhanced cognitive interview, which added additional techniques:

• Reducing anxiety — creating a relaxed, non-threatening atmosphere
• Minimising distractions — conducting the interview in a quiet environment
• Open-ended questions — allowing the witness to give their own account without interruption
• Adapting to the witness — adjusting the pace and style of the interview to suit the individual witness
• Focused retrieval — asking the witness to concentrate on specific aspects of the event (e.g. "focus on what you could hear")

---

Research Evidence

Koehnken et al. (1999): Meta-Analysis

Koehnken et al. conducted a meta-analysis of 55 studies comparing the cognitive interview with standard police interviews. They found that:

• The CI produced 41% more correct recall than standard interviews
• However, the CI also produced a slightly higher number of incorrect details (though the overall proportion of accuracy was still higher)

This suggests the CI is effective at increasing the amount of information recalled but may also produce some inaccurate information.

Real-World Application

Research by Fisher et al. (1990) trained real police detectives in Miami to use the cognitive interview. After training, the detectives obtained 47% more information from witnesses compared to before training, with no increase in inaccurate information.

---

Evaluation of the Cognitive Interview

Strengths

• It is supported by extensive research evidence (e.g. Koehnken et al., Fisher et al.)
• It has been widely adopted by police forces in the UK and around the world
• It is based on well-established psychological principles (encoding specificity, context-dependent memory)
• It increases the amount of accurate information recalled without significantly increasing errors
• The enhanced CI takes into account the emotional state and comfort of the witness

Weaknesses

• It is more time-consuming than standard interviews, which may not be practical in all situations
• It requires training — not all police officers are trained to use it effectively
• Some components may be more effective than others — research suggests that mental reinstatement of context and report everything are the most effective, while recall in reverse order adds less
• The slightly increased error rate means that not all information obtained through the CI can be assumed to be accurate
• It may be less effective with certain groups, such as very young children or people with cognitive impairments

Exam Tip: When evaluating the CI, structure your answer around strengths and weaknesses, and always include specific research evidence. A common high-mark answer would compare the CI to standard interviews using the findings of Koehnken et al. or Fisher et al.

---

Key Points

• The cognitive interview was developed by Fisher and Geiselman (1992).
• It consists of four techniques: mental reinstatement of context, report everything, changed perspective, and reverse order.
• Each technique is based on psychological research into memory.
• The enhanced CI adds techniques for reducing anxiety and using open-ended questions.
• Research shows the CI produces 41% more correct recall than standard interviews.
• It is widely used by police but requires training and is more time-consuming.

---