Initial accounts – references

Page contents

Page contents

Click on the links below to jump to the respective piece of content on this page.

A list of all the sources of information in this guidance. 

First published
Written by College of Policing
Obtaining initial accounts

Practice guideline references

Rapport building

  • Bain, S.A., Baxter, J.S. (2000) Interrogative suggestibility: The role of interviewer behaviour. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 5(1), pp 123-133.
  • Baxter, J.S., Jackson, M., Bain, S.A. (2003) Interrogative suggestibility: Interactions between interviewees’ self-esteem and interviewer style. Personality and Individual differences, 35(6), pp 1285-1292.
  • Baxter, J.S., Boon, J.C., Marley, C. (2006) Interrogative pressure and responses to minimally leading questions. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(1), pp 87-98.
  • Collins, R., Lincoln, R., Frank, M.G. (2002) The effect of rapport in forensic interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 9(1), pp 69-78.
  • Holmberg, U. (2004) Crime victims’ experiences of police interviews and their inclination to provide or omit information. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 6(3), pp 155-170.
  • Kieckhaefer, J.M., Vallano, J.P., Schreiber Compo, N. (2014) Examining the positive effects of rapport building: When and why does rapport building benefit adult eyewitness memory? Memory, 22(8), pp 1010-1023.
  • McGroarty, A., Baxter, J.S. (2009) Interviewer behaviour, interviewee self-esteem and response change in simulated forensic interviews. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(6), pp 642-646.
  • Vallano, J.P., Compo, N.S. (2011) A comfortable witness is a good witness: Rapport‐building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock‐crime interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), pp 960-970.

Witness separation

  • Bodner, G.E., Musch, E., Azad, T. (2009) Re-evaluating the potency of the memory conformity effect. Memory & Cognition, 37(8), pp 1069-1076.
  • Compo, N.S. et al (2012) Intoxicated eyewitnesses: better than their reputation? Law and Human Behavior, 36(2), p 77.
  • Devilly, G.J. et al (2007) An analogue study of the effects of psychological debriefing on eyewitness memory. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(6), pp 1245-1254.
  • French, L., Garry, M., Mori, K. (2008) You say tomato? Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers. Memory, 16(3), pp 262-273.
  • Gabbert, F. (2004) Memory conformity between co-witnesses: The effects of discussion on subsequent memory accuracy. PhD thesis. University of Aberdeen.
  • Gabbert, F. et al (2004) Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9(2), pp 215-227.
  • Hope, L. et al (2008) “With a little help from my friends...”: The role of co-witness relationship in susceptibility to misinformation. Acta Psychologica, 127(2), pp 476-484.
  • Jack, F., Zydervelt, S., Zajac, R. (2014) Are co-witnesses special? Comparing the influence of co-witness and interviewer misinformation on eyewitness reports. Memory, 22(3), pp 243-255.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I. (2006) Comparing methods of encountering post‐event information: The power of co‐witness suggestion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), pp 1083-1099.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I., Forgas, J.P. (2009) Co-witnesses, confederates, and conformity: Effects of discussion and delay on eyewitness memory. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16(sup1), pp S112-S124.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I., Ng, J.R. (2011) Combating Co‐witness contamination: Attempting to decrease the negative effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), pp 43-52.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R., McIntyre, S. (2012) Can a witness report hearsay evidence unintentionally? The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(6), pp 505-527.
  • Rivardo, M.G. et al (2013) Collaborative recall of eyewitness event increases misinformation effect at 1 week. North America Journal of Psychology, 15 (3), pp 495-512.
  • Shaw III, J.S., Garven, S., Wood, J.M. (1997) Co-witness information can have immediate effects on eyewitness memory reports. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), p 503.
  • Underwood, G., Milton, H. (1993) Collusion after collision: Witnesses’ reports of a road accident with and without discussion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, pp 11-22.
  • Vredeveldt, A. et al (2016) When discussion between eyewitnesses helps memory. Legal and Criminological Psychology.
  • Yarmey, A.D., Morris, S. (1998) The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(17), pp 1637-1648

Clarifying sources of information

  • Blank, H., Launay, C. (2014) How to protect eyewitness memory against the misinformation effect: A meta-analysis of postwarning studies. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, pp 77-88.
  • Dodson, C.S., Powers, E., Lytell, M. (2015) Aging, confidence, and misinformation: Recalling information with the cognitive interview. Psychology and Aging, 30(1), p 46.
  • Wyler, H., Oswald, M.E. (2016) Why misinformation is reported: Evidence from a warning and a source-monitoring task. Memory, 24(10), pp 1419-1434

Alcohol intoxication

  • Compo, N.S. et al (2012) Intoxicated eyewitnesses: Better than their reputation? Law and Human Behavior, 36(2), p 77.
  • Crossland, D., Kneller, W., Wilcock, R. (2016) Intoxicated witnesses: Testing the validity of the alcohol myopia theory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(2), pp 270-281.
  • Hagsand, A. et al (2013) Do Sober Eyewitnesses outperform alcohol intoxicated eyewitnesses in a lineup? The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5(1), pp 23-47.
  • Hagsand, A.V. et al (2016) Witnesses stumbling down memory lane: The effects of alcohol intoxication, retention interval, and repeated interviewing. Memory, 25(4), pp 531-543.
  • Harvey, A.J., Kneller, W., Campbell, A.C. (2013) The elusive effects of alcohol intoxication on visual attention and eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(5), pp 617–624.
  • Hildebrand Karlén, M. et al (2015) Alcohol intoxicated eyewitnesses’ memory of intimate partner violence. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(2), pp 156-171.
  • La Rooy, D., Nicol, A., Terry, P. (2013) Intoxicated eyewitnesses: The effects of alcohol on eyewitness recall across repeated interviews. Open Journal of Medical Psychology, 2(3), pp 107–114.
  • Santilla, P., Ekholm, M., Niemi, P. (1999) The effects of alcohol on interrogative suggestibility: The role of State-Anxiety and mood states as mediating factors. Legal and Criminological Psychology 4(1), pp 1-13.
  • Schreiber Compo, N. et al (2016) Witness Memory and Alcohol: The Effects of State-Dependent Recall. Law and Human Behavior, 41(2), pp 202-215.
  • Van Oorsouw, K., Merckelbach, H. (2012) The Effects of Alcohol on Crime‐related Memories: A Field Study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, pp 82–90.Yuille, J.C., Tollestrup, P.A. (1990) Some effects of alcohol on eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(3), pp 268-273

Witnesses’ own words and open questioning

  • Bowles, P.V., Sharman, S.J. (2014) The effect of different types of leading questions on adult eyewitnesses with mild intellectual disabilities. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, pp 129-134.
  • Compo, N.S. et al (2012) Intoxicated eyewitnesses: Better than their reputation? Law and Human Behavior, 36(2), pp 77-86.
  • Evans, J.R., Fisher, R.P. (2011) Eyewitness memory: Balancing the accuracy, precision and quantity of information through metacognitive monitoring and control. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(3), pp 501-508.
  • Flindall, I.R. et al (2015) The preservation of cued recall in the acute mentally fatigued state: A randomised crossover study. World Journal of Surgery, 40, pp 56-65.
  • Hagsand, A.V. et al (2016) Witnesses stumbling down memory lane: The effects of alcohol intoxication, retention interval, and repeated interviewing. Memory, 25(4), pp 1-13.
  • Ibabe, I., Sporer, S.L. (2004) How you ask is what you get: On the influence of question form on accuracy and confidence. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, pp 711-726.
  • Luna, K., Martín‐Luengo, B. (2012) Improving the accuracy of eyewitnesses in the presence of misinformation with the plurality option. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(5), pp 687-693.
  • Luna, K., Higham, P.A., Martín-Luengo, B. (2011) Regulation of memory accuracy with multiple answers: The plurality option. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(2), p 148.
  • Pansky, A., Nemets, E. (2012) Enhancing the quantity and accuracy of eyewitness memory via initial memory testing. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(1), pp 2-10.
  • Pescod, L., Wilcock, R., Milne, R. (2013) Improving eyewitness memory in police call centre interviews. Policing, 7(3), pp 299-306.
  • Sharman, S.J., Powell, M.B. (2012) A comparison of adult witnesses’ suggestibility across various types of leading questions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, pp 48-53.
  • Sheehy, N.P., Chapman, A.J. (1989) Assessing the veracity of children’s testimony. Psychology and Law, 8, pp 331-315.
  • Ternes, M., Yuille, J.C. (2008) Eyewitness memory and eyewitness identification performance in adults with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 21, pp 519-531.
  • Weber, N., Brewer, N. (2008) Eyewitness recall: Regulation of grain size and the role of confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(1), p 50.

Non-leading approach to questioning

  • Baxter, J. et al (2013) The relative influence of leading questions and negative feedback on response change on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (2): Implications for forensic interviewing. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19(3), pp 277-285.
  • Gurney, D. J. (2011) The Misleading Potential of Communicative Hand Gestures in a Forensic Interview. PhD thesis. University of Hertfordshire.Gurney, D.J., Ellis, L.R., Vardon-Hynard, E. (2016) The saliency of gestural misinformation in the perception of a violent crime. Psychology, Crime & Law, 22(7), pp 651-665.
  • Gurney, D.J. (2015) What’s left unsaid: How nonverbal influence compares with verbal influence. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(3), pp 465-473.
  • Henkel, L.A. (2013) Do older adults change their eyewitness reports when re-questioned? Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69(3), pp 356-365.
  • Henkel, L.A. (2017) Inconsistencies across repeated eyewitness interviews: Supportive negative feedback can make witnesses change their memory reports. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23(2), pp 97-117.
  • Hoscheidt, S.M. et al (2014) Encoding negative events under stress: High subjective arousal is related to accurate emotional memory despite misinformation exposure. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 112, pp 237-247.
  • Jack, F., Zydervelt, S., Zajac, R. (2014) Are co-witnesses special? Comparing the influence of co-witness and interviewer misinformation on eyewitness reports. Memory, 22(3), pp 243-255.
  • Leippe, M.R. et al (2006) Effects of social-comparative memory feedback on eyewitnesses’ identification confidence, suggestibility, and retrospective memory reports. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28(3), pp 201-220.
  • McGroarty, A., Baxter, J.S. (2009) Interviewer behaviour, interviewee self-esteem and response change in simulated forensic interviews. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(6), pp 642-646.
  • McMurtrie, H. et al (2012) Consistent witness responses: The effects of age and negative feedback. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(8), pp 958-962.
  • Morgan, C. A. et al (2013) Misinformation can influence memory for recently experienced, highly stressful events. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 36(1), pp 11-17.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I. (2006) Comparing methods of encountering post‐event information: The power of co‐witness suggestion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), pp 1083-1099.
  • Ridley, A.M., Clifford, B.R. (2004) The effects of anxious mood induction on suggestibility to misleading post‐event information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18(2), pp 233-244.
  • Sharman, S.J., Powell, M.B. (2012) A comparison of adult witnesses’ suggestibility across various types of leading questions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, pp 48-53.
  • Shaw III, J.S., Garven, S., Wood, J.M. (1997) Co-witness information can have immediate effects on eyewitness memory reports. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), p 503.
  • Smith, V.L., Ellsworth, P.C. (1987) The social psychology of eyewitness accuracy: Misleading questions and communicator expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), p 294.
  • Zykowski, T., Singg, S. (1999) Effects of Verb and Delay on Recall of an Accident. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88(3_suppl), pp 1231-1234.

Allowing uncertainty

  • Luna, K., Martín‐Luengo, B. (2012) Improving the accuracy of eyewitnesses in the presence of misinformation with the plurality option. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(5), pp 687-693.
  • Luna, K., Higham, P.A., Martín-Luengo, B. (2011) Regulation of memory accuracy with multiple answers: The plurality option. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(2), p 148.
  • Pansky, A., Nemets, E. (2012) Enhancing the quantity and accuracy of eyewitness memory via initial memory testing. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(1), pp 2-10.
  • Scoboria, A., Fisico, S. (2013) Encouraging and clarifying “don’t know” responses enhances interview quality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(1), p 72.
  • Weber, N., Brewer, N. (2008) Eyewitness recall: Regulation of grain size and the role of confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(1), p 50.

Suggesting eye closure

  • Nash, R.A. et al (2016) Does rapport‐building boost the eyewitness eyeclosure effect in closed questioning? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 21(2), pp 305-318.
  • Perfect, T.J. et al (2008) How can we help witnesses to remember more? It’s an (eyes) open and shut case. Law and Human Behavior, 32(4), pp 314-324.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Baddeley, A.D., Hitch, G. J. (2014) The effectiveness of eye‐closure in repeated interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19(2), pp 282-295.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Hitch, G.J., Baddeley, A.D. (2011) Eye closure helps memory by reducing cognitive load and enhancing visualisation. Memory and Cognition, 39, pp 1253-1263.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Penrod, S.D. (2013) Eye-closure improves memory for a witnessed event under naturalistic conditions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19(10), pp 893-905.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Sauer, J.D. (2015) Effects of eye-closure on confidence-accuracy relations in eyewitness testimony. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4(1), pp 51-58.
  • Vredeveldt, A. et al (2015) A field evaluation of the eye-closure interview with witnesses of serious crimes. Law and Human Behavior, 39(2), pp 189-197.

Advice on information exposure

  • Bodner, G.E., Musch, E., Azad, T. (2009) Re-evaluating the potency of the memory conformity effect. Memory & Cognition, 37(8), pp 1069-1076.
  • Bonham, A.J., González-Vallejo, C. (2009) Assessment of calibration for reconstructed eye-witness memories. Acta Psychologica, 131(1), pp 34-52.
  • Calvillo, D.P. et al (2016) Sleep increases susceptibility to the misinformation effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(6), pp 1061-1067.
  • Compo, N.S. et al (2012) Intoxicated eyewitnesses: Better than their reputation? Law and Human Behavior, 36(2), p 77.
  • Devilly, G.J. et al (2007) An analogue study of the effects of psychological debriefing on eyewitness memory. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(6), pp 1245-1254.
  • French, L., Garry, M., Mori, K. (2008) You say tomato? Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers. Memory, 16(3), pp 262-273.
  • Gabbert, F. (2004) Memory conformity between co-witnesses: The effects of discussion on subsequent memory accuracy. PhD thesis. University of Aberdeen. Gabbert, F. et al (2004) Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9(2), pp 215-227.
  • Higham, P.A., Luna, K., Bloomfield, J. (2011) Trace‐strength and source‐monitoring accounts of accuracy and metacognitive resolution in the misinformation paradigm. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), pp 324-335.
  • Hope, L. et al (2008) “With a little help from my friends...”: The role of co-witness relationship in susceptibility to misinformation. Acta Psychologica, 127(2), pp 476-484.
  • Horry, R., Colton, L.M., Williamson, P. (2014) Confidence–accuracy resolution in the misinformation paradigm is influenced by the availability of source cues. Acta Psychologica, 151, pp 164-173.
  • Jack, F., Zydervelt, S., Zajac, R. (2014) Are co-witnesses special? Comparing the influence of co-witness and interviewer misinformation on eyewitness reports. Memory, 22(3), pp 243-255.
  • Kieckhaefer, J.M., Vallano, J.P., Schreiber Compo, N. (2014) Examining the positive effects of rapport building: When and why does rapport building benefit adult eyewitness memory? Memory, 22(8), pp 1010-1023.
  • Monds, L.A. et al (2013) Do distress responses to a traumatic film predict susceptibility to the misinformation effect? Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 14(5), pp 562-575.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I. (2006) Comparing methods of encountering post‐event information: The power of co‐witness suggestion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), pp 1083-1099.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I., Forgas, J.P. (2009) Co-witnesses, confederates, and conformity: Effects of discussion and delay on eyewitness memory. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16(sup1), pp S112-S124.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R.I., Ng, J.R. (2011) Combating Co‐witness contamination: Attempting to decrease the negative effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), pp 43-52.
  • Paterson, H.M., Kemp, R., McIntyre, S. (2012) Can a witness report hearsay evidence unintentionally? The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(6), pp 505-527.
  • Pezdek, K., Greene, J. (1993) Testing eyewitness memory: Developing a measure that is more resistant to suggestibility. Law and Human Behavior, 17(3), p 361.
  • Rivardo, M.G. et al (2013) Collaborative recall of eyewitness event increases misinformation effect at 1 week. North America Journal of Psychology, 15 (3), pp 495-512.
  • Shaw III, J.S., Garven, S., Wood, J.M. (1997) Co-witness information can have immediate effects on eyewitness memory reports. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), p 503.
  • Thorley, C., Rushton‐Woods, J. (2013) Blame conformity: Leading eyewitness statements can influence attributions of blame for an accident. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), pp 291-296.
  • Tiwari, G.K. (2012) The misinformation effect and fate of witnessed minutiae. Indian Journal of Community Psychology, 8(1), pp 134-142.Underwood, J., Pezdek, K. (1998) Memory suggestibility as an example of the sleeper effect. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5(3), pp 449-453.
  • Underwood, G., Milton, H. (1993) Collusion after collision: Witnesses’ reports of a road accident with and without discussion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, pp 11-22.
  • Vallano, J.P., Compo, N.S. (2011) A comfortable witness is a good witness: Rapport-Building and Susceptibility to misinformation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), pp 960-970.
  • Vredeveldt, A. et al (2016) When discussion between eyewitnesses helps memory. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, pp 242-259.Yarmey, A.D., Morris, S. (1998) The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(17), pp 1637-1648.
  • Wyler, H., Oswald, M.E. (2016) Why misinformation is reported: Evidence from a warning and a source-monitoring task. Memory, 24(10), pp 1419-1434.

Strategic recommendation references

Building knowledge and skills

  • Allwood, C.M., Ask, K., Granhag, P.A. (2005) The Cognitive Interview: Effects on the realism in witnesses’ confidence in their free recall. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11(2), pp 183-198.
  • Bensi, L. et al (2011) The Enhanced Cognitive Interview: A study on the efficacy of shortened variants and single techniques. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), pp 311-321.
  • Boon, J., Noon, E. (1994) Changing perspectives in cognitive interviewing. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1(1), pp 59-69.
  • Dando, C.J. et al (2011) When help becomes hindrance: Unexpected errors of omission and commission in eyewitness memory resulting from change temporal order at retrieval. Cognition, 121(3), pp 416-421.
  • Dando, C.J. et al (2011) Modifying the cognitive interview: Countenancing forensic application by enhancing practicability. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17(6), pp 491-511.
  • Dando, C., Wilcock, R., Milne, B. (2009) The cognitive interview: The efficacy of a modified mental reinstatement of context procedure for frontline police investigators. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, pp 138-147.
  • Dando, C. et al (2009) A modified cognitive interview procedure for frontline police investigators. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(5), pp 698-716.
  • Davis, M.R., McMahon, M., Greenwood, K.M. (2005) The efficacy of mnemonic components of the cognitive interview: Towards a shortened variant for time‐critical investigations. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), pp 75-93.
  • Dietze, P.M., Powell, M.B., Thomson, D.M. (2012) Examination of the effect of mental reinstatement of context across developmental level, retention interval and type of mnemonic instruction. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19(1), pp 89-103.
  • Geiselman, R. E. et al (1986) Memory Enhancement Techniques for Interviewing Victims and Witnesses of Crime. US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice (NIJ).
  • Ginet, M., Py, J., Colomb, C. (2013) The Differential Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview Instructions for Enhancing Witnesses’ Memory of a Familiar Event. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 73, pp 25-34.
  • Holliday, R.E. et al (2012) Reducing misinformation effects in older adults with cognitive interview mnemonics. Psychology and Aging, 27(4), p 1191.
  • Hope, L., Mullis, R., Gabbert, F. (2013) Who? What? When? Using a timeline technique to facilitate recall of a complex event. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2(1), pp 20-24.
  • Memon, A. et al (1996) An empirical test of the mnemonic components of the cognitive interview. Psychology and law: Advances in Research, pp 135-145.
  • Nash, R.A. et al (2016) Does rapport‐building boost the eyewitness eye closure effect in closed questioning? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 21(2), pp 305-318.
  • Öhman, L., Eriksson, A., Granhag, P.A. (2013) Enhancing adult’s and children’s earwitness memory: Examining three types of interviews. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20(2), pp 216-229.
  • Perfect, T.J. et al (2008) How can we help witnesses to remember more? It’s an (eyes) open and shut case. Law and Human Behavior, 32(4), pp 314-324.
  • Richards, J. (2015) Improving the preliminary stages of the Criminal Justice System to accommodate people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PhD thesis. University of Portsmouth. Yarmey, A.D. (2004) Eyewitness recall and photo identification: A field experiment. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10(1), pp 53-68.
  • Yarmey, A.D., Yarmey, M.J. (1997) Eyewitness recall and duration estimates in field settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(4), pp 330-344.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Baddeley, A. D., Hitch, G. J. (2014) The effectiveness of eye‐closure in repeated interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19(2), pp 282-295.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Hitch, G.J., Baddeley, A.D. (2011) Eye closure helps memory by reducing cognitive load and enhancing visualisation. Memory and Cognition, 39, pp 1253-1263.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Penrod, S.D. (2013) Eye-closure improves memory for a witnessed event under naturalistic conditions. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19(10), pp 893-905.
  • Vredeveldt, A., Sauer, J. D. (2015) Effects of eye-closure on confidence-accuracy relations in eyewitness testimony. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4(1), pp 51-58.
  • Vredeveldt, A. et al (2015) A field evaluation of the eye-closure interview with witnesses of serious crimes. Law and Human Behavior, 39(2), pp 189-197.

Use of self-administered interviews (SIAs)

  • Gabbert, F., Hope, L., Fisher, R.P. (2009) Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. Law and Human Behavior, 33, pp 298-307.
  • Gabbert, F. et al (2012) Protecting Against Misleading Post-event Information with a Self-Administered Interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(4), pp 568-575.
  • Gawrylowicz, J., Memon, A., Scoboria, A. (2014) Equipping witnesses with transferable skills: The Self- Administered Interview©. Psychology, Crime & Law, 20(4), pp 315-325.
  • Gawrylowicz, J. et al (2014) Enhancing Older Adults’ Eyewitness Memory for Present and Future. Psychology and Aging, 29(4), pp 885-890.
  • Hope, L. et al (2014) Protecting and Enhancing Eyewitness Memory: The Impact of an Initial Recall Attempt on Performance in an Investigative Interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, pp 304–313.
  • Krix, A.C. et al (2014) Providing eyewitnesses with initial retrieval support; what works at immediate and subsequent recall? Psychology, Crime & Law, 20(10), pp 1005-1007.
  • Krix, A.C. et al (2016) Eyewitness evidence obtained with the Self‐Administered Interview© is unaffected by stress. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(1), pp 103-112.
  • Maras, K.L. et al (2014) Evaluating the effectiveness of the Self-Administered Interview© for witnesses with autism spectrum disorder. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(5), pp 693-701.
  • Matsuo, K., Miura, H. (2016) Effectiveness of the Self-Administered Interview and Drawing Pictures for Eliciting Eyewitness Memories. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 24(5), pp 643-654.
  • McPhee, I. et al (2014) The power of the spoken word: Can spoken-recall enhance eyewitness evidence? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 21(4), pp 551-566.
  • Paterson, H.M., Eijkemans, H., Kemp, R.I. (2015) Investigating the impact of delayed administration on the efficacy of the Self- Administered Interview. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), pp 307-317.
  • Sauerland, M. et al (2014) Speaking is silver, writing is golden? The role of cognitive and social factors in written versus spoken witness accounts. Memory and Cognition, 42, pp 978-992.
  • Sauerland, M., Sporer, S.L. (2011) Written vs. Spoken Eyewitness accounts: Does modality of testing matter? Behavioural Sciences and the Law, 29, pp 846-857.
Was this page useful?

Do not provide personal information such as your name or email address in the feedback form. Read our privacy policy for more information on how we use this data

What is the reason for your answer?
I couldn't find what I was looking for
The information wasn't relevant to me
The information is too complicated
Other