Cognitive interview outline and evaluate
In the year 1992 Fisher and Geiselem wrote about cognitive interview. This has four main parts, in which the first main part is report, everything. This is where the witness has to say everything that has happened at the scene. An example of this would be if a child got hurt at school the teacher would have to report everything they had seen and also keep a record of it in a logbook. Second main part is context reinstatement, this helps witnesses jog their memory and create the environment and feelings of the incident mentally. The witness would have to rethink what happened at the scene in their minds. Third main part is for the witness to change the order of the incident. A way to do this is to say what happened in reverse order. The last would be to change the perspective of the scene. Imagining how other witnesses would be able to see what happened at the scene.
There has been research that has supported the effectiveness of cognitive interview (CI). In 1999 Kohnken et al studied 53 meta-analysis in which it was compared CI to the normal police interview. From the studies they found that the amount of precise information recollected was significantly higher when using CI. Research done by Stein and Memon (2006) in Brazil showed that it produced better forensically rich information that to the common police interview. Despite all the benefits of cognitive interview the use of this is not widespread in UK police departments. 1999, Kebbel et al found many officers that were trained in using cognitive interview testified that they did not have the time to conduct in what they believed was a good CI. This was most likely due to being unable to conduct all the parts of cognitive interview necessary for the witness to recall effectively.