Children's recall and the cognitive interview: do the positive effects hold over time?

Abstract

Most studies investigating how the Cognitive Interview affects children's recall have employed short retention intervals (a week or less). In our study children (10-11 years old) saw a film picturing an extraordinary performance by a professional fakir. Half of the children were interviewed after seven days (n ¼ 24) and the other half after six months (n ¼ 25). At each test session, half were interviewed according to the Cognitive Interview (CI), and half according to the Structured Interview (SI). We found that: (a) the children in the CI condition recalled significantly more correct information than the children in the SI condition (both after seven days and after six months), and (b) the children interviewed after seven days recalled significantly more correct information, and less confabulations, compared to the children interviewed after six months. The results suggest that the CI can be used as an investigative tool both after short and long retention intervals.

Exploring Parent–Child Discussions of Crime and their Influence on Children's Memory

“…More information is obtained when open-ended questions are asked (Sternberg et al, 2002), but direct questions may be needed to ensure the completeness of children's reports (Hutcheson et al, 1995;Poole & Lindsay, 1995). When children are asked direct questions however, they often make mistakes in their responses (Larsson et al, 2003;Peterson et al, 1999). Regardless of the type of question asked, information that suggests to a child what might have happened needs to be excluded (Cassel et al, 1996;Thompson et al, 1997).…”

Remembering remotely: would video-mediation impair witnesses' memory reports?

“…Research since the seminal work of Ebbinghaus (1885) has documented the decline in memory completeness over time, demonstrating that forgetting occurs most rapidly in the period immediately following an event (e.g., Ebbesen & Rienick, 1998;Rubin & Wenzel, 1996). Of further concern is that whereas correct recall decreases as the retention interval increases, incorrect recall does not always decrease in a comparable manner, and in some cases even increases (Larsson, Granhag, & Spjut, 2003;Tuckey & Brewer, 2003). The net effect of these patterns is that longer retention intervals often lead to memory reports that are less accurate overall (Ebbesen & Rienick, 1998;Odinot & Wolters, 2006).…”

Making the most of information‐gathering interviews with children

“…Several independent researchers have evaluated and demonstrated the positive effects of using the CI when interviewing children about events staged in the laboratory (e.g. Akehurst, Milne, & Köhnken, 2003;Larsson, 2005;Larsson, Granhag, & Spjut, 2003;Milne & Bull, 2002;Robinson & McGuire, 2006). Children interviewed using the CI report more accurate information than children interviewed in control conditions (see Kö hnken et al, 1999 for a meta-analysis).…”

“…Specifically, because children may have difficulty understanding why they might be asked to change perspective or not start their accounts at the beginning, these techniques should be used with caution with children (Geiselman & Padilla, 1988;Larsson, 2005;Larsson et al, 2003;Saywitz et al, 1992). To further facilitate children's recall, it may be helpful for children to verbalize out aloud (e.g.…”