Mapping Memories: Do Sketchplans Help Young Adolescents Recall more Information about an Event?

<p>A common practice among forensic interviewers in New Zealand involves asking children to draw a sketchplan of the location of the incident to help them recall and report more information about their experiences (Wolfman, Brown & Jose, 2016). There is no evidence to suggest, however, that this technique is useful when used alongside an exhaustive verbal interview. So, the purpose of the current study was to examine whether sketchplans, when used in conjunction with a forensically relevant interview protocol, help young adolescents recall more information about an event. Sixty-eight 11-13 year-old children viewed a staged magic show and, one month later, were interviewed using the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Investigative Interview Protocol. Following the interview, children were asked to either: draw a sketchplan, draw generally, or have a break and think about the event, and were then asked to report anything else they could remember. The visual aids (i.e. sketchplans and drawings) did not increase the amount of new information reported relative to the talk-only condition, but did help children maintain accuracy. Sketchplans did, however, help young adolescents recall location-based information about the event. The findings do not support the use of sketchplans as a tool for helping young adolescents recall more information about their experiences when best practice guidelines are followed. Sketchplans may be useful, however, when location details about the incident are required for the investigation.</p>

Mapping Memories: Do Sketchplans Help Young Adolescents Recall more Information about an Event?

<p>A common practice among forensic interviewers in New Zealand involves asking children to draw a sketchplan of the location of the incident to help them recall and report more information about their experiences (Wolfman, Brown & Jose, 2016). There is no evidence to suggest, however, that this technique is useful when used alongside an exhaustive verbal interview. So, the purpose of the current study was to examine whether sketchplans, when used in conjunction with a forensically relevant interview protocol, help young adolescents recall more information about an event. Sixty-eight 11-13 year-old children viewed a staged magic show and, one month later, were interviewed using the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Investigative Interview Protocol. Following the interview, children were asked to either: draw a sketchplan, draw generally, or have a break and think about the event, and were then asked to report anything else they could remember. The visual aids (i.e. sketchplans and drawings) did not increase the amount of new information reported relative to the talk-only condition, but did help children maintain accuracy. Sketchplans did, however, help young adolescents recall location-based information about the event. The findings do not support the use of sketchplans as a tool for helping young adolescents recall more information about their experiences when best practice guidelines are followed. Sketchplans may be useful, however, when location details about the incident are required for the investigation.</p>

Modern investigative interview models

The article presents the first scientific research in Ukraine on modern investigative interview models and is devoted to this procedural institute as a mechanism of collecting and recording accurate, credible and reliable information during criminal investigations in order to accomplish the objectives of criminal proceedings and to establish the facts of a particular case. This research aimed to analyze main components of such specific investigative interview models as PEACE, PRICE, the RCMP phased interview and KREATIV. Second, it was intended to assess how useful for countries that implemented interviewing in their law systems consider those interview techniques of different types of participants in criminal proceedings (witnesses, victims, suspects). Based on the analysis of the rules of criminal procedural law of individual countries, the scientific positions of scientists, international experience and achievements in the practical application of the interview the authors determine the most used investigative interview models, their advantages and disadvantages of the practical use and the contribution to law enforcement activities. The results indicated at least three major benefits of investigative interview. First, it does not make use of coercive or manipulative strategies which in perspective reduces the chance that a statement will be deemed inadmissible. The second, assuming that obtaining a confession is the desired outcome, before and after the implementation of investigative interview, roughly 50% of interviewees confessed to their crimes; furthermore, the confession rate seems to hover around 50% in countries that continue to use interrogation techniques. And the third, the use of principles well-established scientific knowledge about how memory works (cognitive interview) and the conversation management approach is an effective memory enhancement technique for cooperative interviewees. The authors accent that political, legal, and – most importantly – organizational steps will appear to be that is needed to make the necessary changes for investigative interview to achieve desired results. Summarizing the above, a number of comprehensive recommendations have been made in light of exceptional and discovered circumstances.

Setting the Ground Rules: Use and Practice of Ground Rules in Child Forensic Interviews

Most child forensic interviewing protocols recommend that interviewers administer a series of ground rules to emphasize concepts that are important to accurately answering interview questions. Limited research has examined whether interviewers follow ground rules recommendations in real-world forensic interviews. In this study, we examined how often highly trained interviewers presented and practiced each of the recommended ground rules. We also examined whether children accurately responded to practice questions. We coded transcripts from 241 forensic interviews of 4- to 12-year-old children conducted by interviewers in the United States who were largely trained using the Ten Step Investigative Interview. Results demonstrated that interviewers routinely presented and practiced the ground rules, but this significantly varied by children’s age. Additionally, children often accurately responded to practice questions, but younger children were less accurate than older children. Taken together, results highlight that interviewers may deviate from ground rules recommendations based on the characteristics of the child, which has implications for both future research and practice.