'I Use What I Use': Estonian Investigators' Knowledge of Investigative Interviewing

• Author: Kristjan Kask
• Position: Ph.D., Researcher, University of Tartu
• Pages: 161-169

161

JURIDICA INTERNATIONAL XIX/2012

Kristjan Kask

Ph.D., Researcher

University of Tartu

‘I Use What I Use’:

Estonian Investigators’

Knowledge of Investigative Interviewing*1

1. Introduction

The information obtained from witnesses and victims in criminal investigation is important evidence, with

a signifi cant effect on the overall result.*2 In recent decades, the effect of structured interviewing methods,

such as the cognitive interview, on both child and adult witnesses’ accounts has been thoroughly studied;

however, there has been less research examining which cognitive interview techniques are used more and

how effective these techniques are.

The cognitive interview is one of the most effective procedures for enhancing witnesses’ memory.*3

The original version of this technique consisted of four main elements: 1) reinstatement of mental context,

2) reporting of everything, 3) recall of events in different order, and 4) a change in perspective.*4 Later, the

‘enhanced’ cognitive interview was developed*5, a form with additional instructions, establishment of rap-

port, transfer of control of the interview to the witness, ensuring of questions’ compatibility with the wit-

ness’s background and state, encouragement to use focused retrieval, and application of imagery.

Cognitive interviews have been effective when compared to standard police interviews.*6 Koehnken,

Thurer, and Zoberbier*7 have found that cognitive interviews produced 35% more information than did

standard interviews. Also, effectiveness of the ‘enhanced’ form has been demonstrated.*8 Although there is

an increase in the absolute quantity of incorrect information when the cognitive interview is used, there is

1 I wish to thank Hannes Hansalu, for gathering some of the data, and all of the investigators who participated in this research.

2 C. Dando, R. Wilcock, R. Milne. The cognitive interview: Inexperienced police offi cers’ perceptions of their witness/victim

interviewing practices. – Legal and Criminological Psychology 2008/1, pp. 59–70.

3 R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman. Memory Enhancing Techniques for Investigative Interviewing: The Cognitive Interview. Spring-

fi eld, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas 1992.

4 R.E. Geiselman, R.P. Fisher, I. Firstenberg, L.A. Hutton, S.J. Sullivan, I.V. Avetissian, A.L. Prosk. Enhancement of eyewitness

memory: An empirical evaluation of the cognitive interview. – Journal of Police Science & Administration 1984/3, pp. 74–80.

5 R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman, M. Amador. Field test of the Cognitive Interview: Enhancing the recollection of actual victims

and witnesses of crime. – Journal of Applied Psychology 1989/5, pp. 722–727; R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman, D.S. Raymond,

L.M. Jurkevich, M.L. Warhaftig. Enhancing enhanced eyewitness memory: Refi ning the cognitive interview. – Journal of

Police Science & Administration 1987a/4, pp. 291–297.

6 R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman, D.S. Raymond. Critical analysis of police interview techniques. – Journal of Police Science &

Administration 1987b/3, pp. 177–185.

7 G. Kohnken, C. Thurer, D. Zoberbier. The cognitive interview: Are the investigators’ memories enhanced too? – Applied

Cognitive Psychology 1994/1, pp. 13–24.

8 Fisher, Geiselman (see Note 3); A. Memon, R. Bull. The cognitive interview: Its origins, empirical support, evaluation and

practical implications. – Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 1991/4, pp. 291–307; G. Koehnken, R. Milne,

A. Memon, R. Bull. The cognitive interview: A meta-analysis. – Psychology, Crime & Law 1999/1–2, pp. 3–27.