The questioning of eyewitness is a very sensitive process that take to be carried out with c ar and logic if it is to get ahead in its aims. However, it has been shown that the reposition is fallible and can fail when it comes to refunding stored reading in that it recalls false information about events that didnt really happen. This because poses a problem when eyewitnesses are interviewed as they can oftentimes recall information that is false and and so delay the investigation. bartlett pear adduce that memories are reconstructions in accordance with a scheme and that they are not videos. Loftus also made similar findings to this; he utter that the retentiveness is influenced by the questions asked as memories are reconstructions. This therefore shows that in order to improve the random nature of interviews the supra mental principles need to be applied. In light of this, Tulving and Thompson (1973) investigated the encode specificity principle. They fix that du e to memories being encoded, stored and the retrieved it is easier to retrieve a retentiveness when you are in the same stimulated or physical state as when you encoded it.
Therefore, in a cognitive interview enquire the interviewee to re ?create mentally the physical and emotional dorsumground of the incident may jog their memory and so they will be able to give a more blameless description of what happened. Police may also take them lynchpin to the scene of the crime and try and reconstruct the incident in a Crimewatch style to see if this sets off any memory triggers. Loftus and Collins (1975) also ca me up with a model that by chance applied t! o interviewing techniques. The spreading activation model shows that concepts in the colossal term memory are linked semantically i.e. by means of semantic nets. Therefore to improve the interviewing techniques... If you ask to get a full essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment