Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.

Eyewitnesses to a filmed event were interviewed twice using a Cognitive Interview to examine the effects of variations in delay between the repeated interviews (immediately & 2 days; immediately & 7 days; 7 & 9 days) and the identity of the interviewers (same or different across the two...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Geralda Odinot, Amina Memon, David La Rooy, Ailsa Millen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3789709?pdf=render
id doaj-eae3f9bfc64e40bdae7741a0d900a4b2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-eae3f9bfc64e40bdae7741a0d900a4b22020-11-24T21:35:37ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-01810e7630510.1371/journal.pone.0076305Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.Geralda OdinotAmina MemonDavid La RooyAilsa MillenEyewitnesses to a filmed event were interviewed twice using a Cognitive Interview to examine the effects of variations in delay between the repeated interviews (immediately & 2 days; immediately & 7 days; 7 & 9 days) and the identity of the interviewers (same or different across the two repeated interviews). Hypermnesia (an increase in total amount of information recalled in the repeated interview) occurred without any decrease in the overall accuracy. Reminiscence (the recall of new information in the repeated interview) was also found in all conditions but was least apparent in the longest delay condition, and came with little cost to the overall accuracy of information gathered. The number of errors, increased across the interviews, but the relative accuracy of participants' responses was unaffected. However, when accuracy was calculated based on all unique details provided across both interviews and compared to the accuracy of recall in just the first interview it was found to be slightly lower. The identity of the interviewer (whether the same or different across interviews) had no effects on the number of correct details. There was an increase in recall of new details with little cost to the overall accuracy of information gathered. Importantly, these results suggest that witnesses are unlikely to report everything they remember during a single Cognitive Interview, however exhaustive, and a second opportunity to recall information about the events in question may provide investigators with additional information.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3789709?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Geralda Odinot
Amina Memon
David La Rooy
Ailsa Millen
spellingShingle Geralda Odinot
Amina Memon
David La Rooy
Ailsa Millen
Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Geralda Odinot
Amina Memon
David La Rooy
Ailsa Millen
author_sort Geralda Odinot
title Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
title_short Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
title_full Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
title_fullStr Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
title_full_unstemmed Are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
title_sort are two interviews better than one? eyewitness memory across repeated cognitive interviews.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Eyewitnesses to a filmed event were interviewed twice using a Cognitive Interview to examine the effects of variations in delay between the repeated interviews (immediately & 2 days; immediately & 7 days; 7 & 9 days) and the identity of the interviewers (same or different across the two repeated interviews). Hypermnesia (an increase in total amount of information recalled in the repeated interview) occurred without any decrease in the overall accuracy. Reminiscence (the recall of new information in the repeated interview) was also found in all conditions but was least apparent in the longest delay condition, and came with little cost to the overall accuracy of information gathered. The number of errors, increased across the interviews, but the relative accuracy of participants' responses was unaffected. However, when accuracy was calculated based on all unique details provided across both interviews and compared to the accuracy of recall in just the first interview it was found to be slightly lower. The identity of the interviewer (whether the same or different across interviews) had no effects on the number of correct details. There was an increase in recall of new details with little cost to the overall accuracy of information gathered. Importantly, these results suggest that witnesses are unlikely to report everything they remember during a single Cognitive Interview, however exhaustive, and a second opportunity to recall information about the events in question may provide investigators with additional information.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3789709?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT geraldaodinot aretwointerviewsbetterthanoneeyewitnessmemoryacrossrepeatedcognitiveinterviews
AT aminamemon aretwointerviewsbetterthanoneeyewitnessmemoryacrossrepeatedcognitiveinterviews
AT davidlarooy aretwointerviewsbetterthanoneeyewitnessmemoryacrossrepeatedcognitiveinterviews
AT ailsamillen aretwointerviewsbetterthanoneeyewitnessmemoryacrossrepeatedcognitiveinterviews
_version_ 1725944863773425664