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.