A comparison of different investigative interviewing techniques in generating differential recall enhancement and detecting deception

Jacob De Rosa, Cheryl Hiscock-Anisman, Adam Blythe, Glynis Bogaard, Ashley Hally, Kevin Colwell*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This study compared the Stepwise Interview, Cognitive Interview, and Reality Interview in detecting deception with inmates. The dependent measures were the amount of unique details provided during the free narrative and mnemonics and the number of words provided during the free narrative and mnemonics of each interview. The Stepwise Interview generated 58.3% accuracy, the Cognitive Interview generated 70.0% accuracy, and the Reality Interview generated 93.3% accuracy. The different tasks of these interviews increased the differences between honest and deceptive statements and therefore, increased the accuracy in detection of deception. Differential recall enhancement is used to explain the findings.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)44-58
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2019

Keywords

  • credibility assessment
  • detecting deception
  • investigative interviewing
  • POLICE OFFICERS
  • COGNITIVE LOAD
  • STRATEGIC USE
  • ELICIT CUES
  • EFFICACY
  • ABILITY
  • GUILTY
  • DECEIT
  • LIES
  • ACID

Cite this