Memon A, Wark L, Holley A, Bull R, Koehnken G
University of Texas at Dallas, School of Human Development, Richardson 75083-0688, USA.
Memory. 1997 Sep;5(5):639-56. doi: 10.1080/741941481.
This paper addresses two methodological and theoretical questions relating to the Cognitive Interview (CI), which previous research has found to increase witness recall in interviews. (1) What are the effects of the CI mnemonic techniques when communication techniques are held constant? (2) How do trained interviewers compare with untrained interviewers? In this study, witnesses (college students) viewed a short film clip of a shooting and were questioned by interviewers (research assistants) trained in conducting the CI or a Structured Interview (SI)--similar to the CI except for the "cognitive" components--or by untrained interviewers (UI). The CI and SI groups recalled significantly more correct information compared to the UI group. However they also reported more errors and confabulated details. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed in terms of precisely identifying the CI facilitatory effects and consequent good practice in the forensic setting.
本文探讨了与认知访谈（CI）相关的两个方法学和理论问题，先前的研究发现该方法可提高访谈中证人的回忆能力。（1）当沟通技巧保持不变时，CI记忆技巧会产生什么效果？（2）经过训练的访谈者与未经训练的访谈者相比如何？在本研究中，证人（大学生）观看了一段枪击事件的短片，并接受了接受过CI或结构化访谈（SI）培训的访谈者（研究助理）的询问——SI与CI类似，但没有“认知”成分——或者接受未经训练的访谈者（UI）的询问。与UI组相比，CI组和SI组回忆起的正确信息明显更多。然而，他们也报告了更多的错误和虚构细节。研究结果的理论和实践意义将从精确识别CI促进效果以及在法医环境中的后续良好实践方面进行讨论。
