Forensic Psychology

by Graham M Davies

  7.5 SUMMARY

  Interviewers face many challenges when conducting investigative interviews. In the 1980s and 1990s, researchers identified a number of shortcomings of traditional investigative interviews (e.g. frequent interruptions, complex questions, failure to account for individual differences in witness abilities).

  The Memorandum of Good Practice (MOGP) and the Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) guidelines were established in England and Wales to begin to address some of the shortcomings found in traditional investigative interviews.

  The Cognitive Interview (CI) is a best-practice interviewing protocol primarily used with cooperative, adult witnesses. The CI reliably increases the amount of information recalled by witnesses. Several CI variants are available to accommodate different interview conditions (e.g. time constraints, multiple witnesses).

  Children, the elderly, and individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities are considered “vulnerable” witnesses.

  Children’s developing cognitive and social abilities make interviewing them in legal contexts especially challenging. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol is a developmentally-appropriate, empirically-based protocol that has been shown to increase the quantity and accuracy of information that children recall.

  The elderly may be more suggestible than younger adults, and they tend to provide less complete and accurate event accounts compared to younger adults. The CI enhances the event recall of the elderly just as it does with younger adults.

  Individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) can recall event details accurately, but often provide fewer event details and are more suggestible than those without ID. Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may not differ in the quality and quantity of their event recall or their suggestibility compared to same-aged peers, but they tend to have marked deficits in social abilities that could present difficulties within an interview context. With slight modifications, best-practice interview protocols may still facilitate the recall of these populations.

  ESSAY/DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  What were some of the shortcomings of traditional investigative interviews and how did the Memorandum of Good Practice (MOGP) and Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) guidelines begin to address some of these shortcomings?

  Describe the key components of the Cognitive Interview (CI) and in what ways these techniques facilitate how witnesses recall event details. Under what conditions might interviewers consider using a variant or modified version of the CI?

  How do children differ from adults in ways that have implications for children’s performance in investigative interviews? In what ways does the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol accommodate children’s developing cognitive and social abilities?

  What characteristics make individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities and the elderly “vulnerable” witnesses? How effective are best-practice interviewing protocols at facilitating the recall of event-related information from these populations?

  ANNOTATED READING LIST

  Fisher, R. P., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2011). Interviewing cooperative witnesses. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 16–19. Provides a very brief overview of elements of the Cognitive Interview, the flexibility of this interview tool within a legal context, and empirical support for its use.

  Lamb, M. E., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P. W. (2008). Tell me what happened: Structured investigative interviews of child victims and witnesses. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &

  Sons Inc. Discusses the cognitive and social abilities of children as eyewitnesses, the development of the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol, and research supporting its use.

  Lamb, M. E., La Rooy, D. J., Malloy, L. C., & Katz, C. (Eds.). (2011). Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Provides a comprehensive look at the challenges that children may face as eyewitnesses (with a discussion of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities), important considerations for interviewing children, and children’s participation in the legal system.

  Maras, K. L., & Bowler, D. M. (2014). Eyewitness testimony in autism spectrum disorder: A review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44, 2682–2697. Reviews the memory impairments of individuals with autism spectrum disorder and research studies examining their performance in eyewitness contexts.

  Toglia, M. P., Ross, D. F., Pozzulo, J., & Pica, E. (Eds). (2014). The elderly eyewitness in court. New York: Psychology Press. Examines research on the ability of the elderly to be effective eyewitnesses and perceptions of the elderly in the legal system.

  REFERENCES

  Acierno, R., Hernandez, M. A., Amstadter, A. B., Resnick, H. S., Steve, K., Muzzy, W., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2010). Prevalence and correlates of emotional, physical, sexual, and financial abuse and potential neglect in the United States: The national elder mistreatment study. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 292–297.

  American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed). Washington, DC: APA.

  Anderson, R. C., & Pichert, J. W. (1978). Recall of previously unrecallable information following a shift in perspective. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 17, 1–12.

  Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58, v-165.

  Balota, D. A., Dolan, P. O., & Duchek, J. M. (2000). Memory changes in healthy older adults. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 395–409). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  Baron-Cohen, S. (2000). Theory of mind and autism: A fifteen year review. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg , & D. Cohen (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed.), (pp. 3–20). New York: Oxford University Press.

  Bartlett, J. (2014). The older eyewitness. In T. Perfect & D. Lindsay (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of applied memory (pp. 654–675). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

  Benia, L. R., Hauck-Filho, N., Dillenburg, M., & Stein, L. M. (2015). The NICHD investigative interview protocol: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse: Research, Treatment, & Program Innovations for Victims, Survivors, & Offenders, 24, 259–279.

  Bennett, G., Jenkins, G., & Asif, Z. (2000). Listening is not enough: An analysis of calls to the Elder Abuse Response. The Journal of Adult Protection, 2, 6–20.

  Biggs, S., Erens, B., Doyle, M., Hall, J., & Sanchez, M. (2013). Abuse and neglect of older people: Secondary analysis of UK prevalence study. London: National Centre for Social Research. Retrieved from http://www.natcen.ac.uk/media/20824/abuse-neglect-older-people.pdf

  Bornstein, B. H. (1995). Memory processes in elderly eyewitnesses: What we know and what we don’t know. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 13, 349–363.

  Bottoms, B. L., & Goodman, G. S. (1994). Perceptions of children’s credibility in sexual assault cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 702–732.

  Brown, C. L., & Geiselman, R. E. (1990). Eyewitness testimony of mentally retarded: Effect of the Cognitive Interview. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 6, 14–22.

  Brown, D. A., Lamb, M. E., Lewis, C., Pipe, M., Orbach, Y., & Wolfman, M. (2013). The NICHD investigative interview protocol: An analogue study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19, 367–382.

  Brown, D. A., Lewis, C. N., & Lamb, M. E. (2015). Preserving the past: An early interview improves delayed event memory in children with intellectual disabilities. Child Development, 86, 1031–1047.

  Brown, D. A., Lewis, C. N., Lamb, M. E., & Stephens, E. (2012). The influences of delay and severity of intellectual disability on event memory in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80, 829–841.

  Bruck, M., & Ceci, S. J. (1999). The suggestibility of children’s memor
y. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 419–439.

  Bruck, M., London, K., Landa, R., & Goodman, J. (2007). Autobiographical memory and suggestibility in children with autism spectrum disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 73–95.

  Carter, C. A., Bottoms, B. L., & Levine, M. (1996). Linguistic and socioemotional influences on the accuracy of children’s reports. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 335–358.

  Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children’s testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

  Clare, I. C., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (1993). Interrogative suggestibility, confabulation, and acquiescence in people with mild learning disabilities (mental handicap): Implications for reliability during police interrogations. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 295–301.

  Craik, F. I. M., & Jennings, J. M. (1992). Human memory. In F. I. M. Craik & T. A. Salthouse (Eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition. (pp. 51–110). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

  Dando, C. J., Wilcock, R., Behnkle, C., & Milne, R. (2011). Modifying the Cognitive Interview: Countenancing forensic application by enhancing practicability. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17, 491–511.

  Dando, C., Wilcock, R., & Milne, R. (2008). The Cognitive Interview: Inexperienced police officers’ perceptions of their witness/victim interviewing practices. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 59–70.

  Dando, C., Wilcock, R., Milne, R., & Henry, L. (2009). A modified Cognitive Interview procedure for frontline police investigators. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 698–716.

  Davis, M. R., McMahon, M., & Greenwood, K. M. (2005). The efficacy of mnemonic components of the Cognitive Interview: Towards a shortened variant for time-critical investigations. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 75–93.

  Department for Education. (2016, November 3). Characteristics of children in need: 2015 to 2016. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/characteristics-of- children-in-need-2015-to-2016

  Everington, C., & Fulero, S. M. (1999). Competence to confess: Measuring understanding and suggestibility of defendants with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 37, 212–220.

  Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques in investigative interviewing: The Cognitive Interview. Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas.

  Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Amador, M. (1989). Field test of the Cognitive Interview: Enhancing the recollection of the actual victims and witnesses of crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 722–727.

  Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Raymond, D. S. (1987). Critical analysis of police interview techniques. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 177–185.

  Fisher, R. P., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2011). Interviewing cooperative witnesses. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 16–19.

  Fisher, R. P., Ross, S. J., & Cahill, B. S. (2010). Interviewing witnesses and victims. In P. A. Granhag (Ed.), Forensic psychology in context: Nordic and international approaches. (pp. 56–74). Devon, United Kingdom: Willan Publishing.

  Fisher, R.P., Schreiber Compo, N., Rivard, J., & Hirn, D. (2014). Interviewing witnesses. In T. Perfect & S. Lindsay (Eds.) Handbook of Applied Memory (pp. 559–578). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Press.

  Gabbert, F., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2009). Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 298–307.

  Gabbert, F., Memon, A., & Allan, K. (2003). Memory conformity: Can eyewitnesses influence each other’s memories for an event? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 533–543.

  Gawrylowicz, J., Memon, A., Scoboria, A., Hope, L., & Gabbert, F. (2014). Enhancing older adults’ eyewitness memory for present and future events with the self-administered interview. Psychology and Aging, 29, 885–890.

  Gentle, M., Milne, R., Powell, M. B., & Sharman, S. J. (2013). Does the Cognitive Interview promote the coherence of narrative accounts in children with and without an intellectual disability? International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 60, 30–43.

  George, R. C., & Clifford, B. (1992). Making the most of witnesses. Policing, 8, 185−198.

  Gudjonsson, G. H., & Henry, L. (2003). Child and adult witnesses with intellectual disability: The importance of suggestibility. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 8, 241–252.

  Happé , F., & Frith, U. (2006). The weak coherence account: Detail-focused cognitive style in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 5–25.

  Henry, L. A., Bettenay, C., & Carney, D. P. (2011b). Children with intellectual disabilities and developmental disorders. In M. E. Lamb, D. J. La Rooy, L. C. Malloy , & C. Katz (Eds.), Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (pp. 251–283). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

  Henry, L. A., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). Eyewitness memory, suggestibility, and repeated recall sessions in children with mild and moderate intellectual disabilities. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 481–505.

  Henry, L. A., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2007). Individual and developmental differences in eyewitness recall and suggestibility in children with intellectual disabilities. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 361–381.

  Henry, L., Ridley, A., Perry, J., & Crane, L. (2011a). Perceived credibility and eyewitness testimony of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55, 385–391.

  Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, & Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (2014). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings – A joint inspection. London: Author.

  Hershkowitz, I., Lamb, M. E., & Katz, C. (2014). Allegation rates in forensic child abuse investigations: Comparing the revised and standard NICHD protocols. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20, 336–344.

  Holliday, R. E., Humphries, J. E., Milne, R., Memon, A., Houlder, L., Lyons, A., & Bull, R. (2012). Reducing misinformation effects in older adults with Cognitive Interview mnemonics. Psychology and Aging, 27, 1191–1203.

  Home Office. (1992). Memorandum of good practice on video recorded interviews with child witnesses for criminal proceedings. London: Author.

  Home Office. (2002). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance for vulnerable or intimidated witnesses, including children. London: Author.

  Home Office. (2007). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and using special measures. London: Author.

  Jacoby, L. L., & Rhodes, M. G. (2006). False remembering in the aged. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 49–53.

  Johnson, M. K , Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3–28.

  Kebbell, M. R., & Hatton, C. (1999). People with mental retardation as witnesses in court: A review. Mental Retardation, 37, 179–187.

  Kebbell, M. R., Milne, R., & Wagstaff, G. F. (1999). The Cognitive Interview: A survey of its forensic effectiveness. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 101–115.

  Lamb, M. E., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P. W. (2008). Tell me what happened: Structured investigative interviews of child victims and witnesses. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

  Lamb, M. E., La Rooy, D. J., Malloy, L. C., & Katz, C. (Eds.). (2011). Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

  Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Esplin, P. W., & Horowitz, D. (2007a). A structured forensic interview protocol improves the quality and informativeness of investigative interviews with children: A review of research using the NICHD investigative interview protocol. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 1201–1231.

  Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Horowitz, D., & Abbott, C. B. (2007b). Does the type of prompt affect the accuracy of information provided by alleged victims of abuse in forensic interviews? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 1117–1130.

  Lamb, M. E.,
Sternberg, K. J., Orbach, Y., Esplin, P. W., & Mitchell, S. (2002). Is ongoing feedback necessary to maintain the quality of investigative interviews with allegedly abused children? Applied Developmental Science, 6, 35–41.

  La Rooy , D., Pipe, M. E., & Murray, J. E. (2005). Reminiscence and hypermnesia in children’s eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90, 235–254.

  List, J. A. (1986). Age and schematic differences in the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Developmental Psychology, 22, 50–57.

  Loftus, E. F., Levidow, B., & Duensing, S. (1992). Who remembers best? Individual differences in memory for events that occurred in a science museum. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 93–107.

  MacNeil, B. M., Lopes, V. A., & Minnes, P. M. (2009). Anxiety in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 1–21.

  Malloy, L. C., Brubacher, S. P., & Lamb, M. E. (2011). Expected consequences of disclosure revealed in investigative interviews with suspected victims of child sexual abuse. Applied Developmental Science, 15, 8–19.

  Malloy, L. C., Katz, C., Lamb, M. E., & Mugno, A. P. (2015). Children’s requests for clarification in investigative interviews about suspected sexual abuse. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29, 323–333.

  Malloy, L. C., Lyon, T. D., & Quas, J. A. (2007). Filial dependency and recantation of child sexual abuse allegations. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 46, 162–170.