The cognitive interview: comparing face-to-face and video-mediated interviews

Purpose: Eyewitness testimony can determine the outcome of criminal investigations. The cognitive interview (CI) has been widely used to collect informative and accurate accounts. However, face-to-face interviews have been restricted during the current pandemic, raising the need for using video-conferencing. The authors tested whether virtual interviews could produce elaborate accounts from eyewitnesses and if the CI superiority effect against a structured interview (SI) could be fully replicated online. Design/methodology/approach: The authors used a 2 × 2 factorial design with interview condition (CI vs SI) and environment (face-to-face vs virtual) manipulated between-subjects. A total of 88 participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. Participants watched a mock robbery and were interviewed 48 h later using either the SI or the CI. Both interviews contained the same structure and interview phases but only the CI included its key cognitive mnemonics/ instructions. Both sessions were either face-to-face or online. Findings: Participants interviewed with the CI recalled more information than participants interviewed with the SI, regardless of the interview environment. Both environments produced a comparable amount of recall. Report accuracy was high for all groups. Practical implications: This can be crucial to inform police practices and research in this field by suggesting investigative interviews can be conducted virtually in situations such as the current pandemic or when time and resources do not allow for face-to-face interviewing. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study showing that the CI superiority effect can be replicated online and that a fully remote CI can produce elaborate accounts.