Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool

Fiona Gabbert, Lorraine Hope, Ronald P. Fisher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Given the crucial role of eyewitness evidence, statements should be obtained as soon as possible after an incident. This is not always achieved due to demands on police resources. Two studies trace the development of a new tool, the Self-Administered Interview (SAI), designed to elicit a comprehensive initial statement. In Study 1, SAI participants reported more correct details than participants who provided a free recall account, and performed at the same level as participants given a Cognitive Interview. In Study 2, participants viewed a simulated crime and half recorded their statement using the SAI. After a delay of 1 week, all participants completed a free recall test. SAI participants recalled more correct details in the delayed recall task than control participants.
Original languageEnglish
JournalLaw and Human Behavior
DOIs
StatePublished - 17 Jun 2008

Fingerprint

Free recall
Eyewitness
participant
Interviews
interview
Police
Resources
Crime
Efficacy
statement
tool
incident
police
offense
demand
resources
control
test
development

Cite this

Gabbert, Fiona; Hope, Lorraine; Fisher, Ronald P. / Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool.

In: Law and Human Behavior, 17.06.2008.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{236850cacd4b427497633ad9df2bc93a,
title = "Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool",
abstract = "Given the crucial role of eyewitness evidence, statements should be obtained as soon as possible after an incident. This is not always achieved due to demands on police resources. Two studies trace the development of a new tool, the Self-Administered Interview (SAI), designed to elicit a comprehensive initial statement. In Study 1, SAI participants reported more correct details than participants who provided a free recall account, and performed at the same level as participants given a Cognitive Interview. In Study 2, participants viewed a simulated crime and half recorded their statement using the SAI. After a delay of 1 week, all participants completed a free recall test. SAI participants recalled more correct details in the delayed recall task than control participants.",
author = "Fiona Gabbert and Lorraine Hope and Fisher, {Ronald P.}",
year = "2008",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1007/s10979-008-9146-8",
journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
issn = "0147-7307",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. / Gabbert, Fiona; Hope, Lorraine; Fisher, Ronald P.

In: Law and Human Behavior, 17.06.2008.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool

AU - Gabbert,Fiona

AU - Hope,Lorraine

AU - Fisher,Ronald P.

PY - 2008/6/17

Y1 - 2008/6/17

N2 - Given the crucial role of eyewitness evidence, statements should be obtained as soon as possible after an incident. This is not always achieved due to demands on police resources. Two studies trace the development of a new tool, the Self-Administered Interview (SAI), designed to elicit a comprehensive initial statement. In Study 1, SAI participants reported more correct details than participants who provided a free recall account, and performed at the same level as participants given a Cognitive Interview. In Study 2, participants viewed a simulated crime and half recorded their statement using the SAI. After a delay of 1 week, all participants completed a free recall test. SAI participants recalled more correct details in the delayed recall task than control participants.

AB - Given the crucial role of eyewitness evidence, statements should be obtained as soon as possible after an incident. This is not always achieved due to demands on police resources. Two studies trace the development of a new tool, the Self-Administered Interview (SAI), designed to elicit a comprehensive initial statement. In Study 1, SAI participants reported more correct details than participants who provided a free recall account, and performed at the same level as participants given a Cognitive Interview. In Study 2, participants viewed a simulated crime and half recorded their statement using the SAI. After a delay of 1 week, all participants completed a free recall test. SAI participants recalled more correct details in the delayed recall task than control participants.

U2 - 10.1007/s10979-008-9146-8

DO - 10.1007/s10979-008-9146-8

M3 - Article

JO - Law and Human Behavior

T2 - Law and Human Behavior

JF - Law and Human Behavior

SN - 0147-7307

ER -