what would you give my cognitive interview evaluation points

Watch this thread
jakewatkins22
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#1
hi, these are my cognitive interview evaluation points. could you say what could be improved, and if this was in a 16 marker with very strong ao1 how many marks would you say this would receive?

a strength of the cognitive interview is there’s research supporting the techniques effectiveness. research has found a 41% increase in accurate recall from witness when the CI was used compared to the standard police interview (SPI) illustrating its effectiveness to improve eyewitnesses recall
however, we must consider how it was also found that there was an increase in inaccurate information recalled when the ECI was used, but this does not mean we should abandon the CI and the ECI, despite the techniques limitations, the 41% increase in accuracy of the CI can have a positive impact such as reducing false imprisonments, and improving the justice system as a whole. therefore instead of criticising the CI and the ECI, we should consider it from a positive light and look at how it can be improved instead

furthermore, the CI has found to have real world application as well. this is a strength because although all 4 techniques have found to be accurate in improving recall, reporting everything and context reinstatement has found to be the most effective when used in combination. therefore, using these 2 techniques in particular could lead to more of the correct offenders being put away, allowing for society to be protected and justice being served to victims. illustrating the credibility of the CI
what should be acknowledged though is how it could be argued that not all elements of the CI are useful if two elements being used in combination are producing the most accurate recall. highlighting how conducting the full CI is a waste of time and resources as police require specialist training to conduct the CI which is extremely time consuming and costly. therefore, decreasing the effectiveness of the CI as it’s not a realistic method for police to use to interview witnesses with
0
reply
jakewatkins22
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#2
what do you mean it’s too less?
it’s kind of 4 points. the first point is about its effectiveness (which is brief) but it’s counterpointed which makes up for most of it
the second one is 2, combination produces best recall etc counterpointed with how it may be a waste of time and resources
so it’s basically 2 VERY chunky paragraphs, but it’s 4 kind of if you know what i mean?
but thank you i appreciate this! i did this from memory (excuse the pun) so hopefully i do remember it
0
reply
Mentalhealth*12
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 2 months ago
#3
A strength of the cognitive interview (CI) is the strength of the research supporting the technique's effectiveness. When the CI was used instead of the standard police interview (SPI), there was a 41% increase in accurate recall from a witness, demonstrating its effectiveness in improving eyewitness recall.

However, we must consider how it was found that there was an increase in inaccurate information recalled when the ECI was used, but this does not mean we should abandon the CI and the ECI. Despite the technique's limitations, the 41% increase in accuracy of the CI can have a positive impact, such as reducing false imprisonments and improving the justice system as a whole. Therefore, instead of criticising the CI and the ECI, we should consider them from a positive perspective and look at how they can be improved instead.

Furthermore, the CI has been found to have real-world applications as well. This is a strength because although all 4 techniques have been found to be accurate in improving recall, reporting everything and context reinstatement have been found to be the most effective when used in combination. Therefore, using these 2 techniques in particular could lead to more of the correct offenders being put away, allowing for society to be protected and justice to be served to victims. This demonstrates the credibility of the CI.

What should be acknowledged, though, is that it could be argued that not all elements of the CI are useful if two elements being used in combination are producing the most accurate recall. This demonstrates how conducting the full CI is a waste of time and resources, as police require specialist training to conduct the CI, which is extremely time-consuming and costly. This therefore decreases the effectiveness of the CI as it can sometimes not be a realistic method for police to use to interview witnesses.


"Decreasing the effectiveness of the CI as it’s not a realistic method for police to use to interview witnesses with" is an assertion that needs evidence to back it up.
"The 41% increase in accuracy of the CI can have a positive impact such as reducing false imprisonments" is an assertion considering you stated it also increases the likelihood of inaccurate information.
0
reply
jakewatkins22
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#4
(Original post by Mentalhealth*12)
A strength of the cognitive interview (CI) is the strength of the research supporting the technique's effectiveness. When the CI was used instead of the standard police interview (SPI), there was a 41% increase in accurate recall from a witness, demonstrating its effectiveness in improving eyewitness recall.

However, we must consider how it was found that there was an increase in inaccurate information recalled when the ECI was used, but this does not mean we should abandon the CI and the ECI. Despite the technique's limitations, the 41% increase in accuracy of the CI can have a positive impact, such as reducing false imprisonments and improving the justice system as a whole. Therefore, instead of criticising the CI and the ECI, we should consider them from a positive perspective and look at how they can be improved instead.

Furthermore, the CI has been found to have real-world applications as well. This is a strength because although all 4 techniques have been found to be accurate in improving recall, reporting everything and context reinstatement have been found to be the most effective when used in combination. Therefore, using these 2 techniques in particular could lead to more of the correct offenders being put away, allowing for society to be protected and justice to be served to victims. This demonstrates the credibility of the CI.

What should be acknowledged, though, is that it could be argued that not all elements of the CI are useful if two elements being used in combination are producing the most accurate recall. This demonstrates how conducting the full CI is a waste of time and resources, as police require specialist training to conduct the CI, which is extremely time-consuming and costly. This therefore decreases the effectiveness of the CI as it can sometimes not be a realistic method for police to use to interview witnesses.


"Decreasing the effectiveness of the CI as it’s not a realistic method for police to use to interview witnesses with" is an assertion that needs evidence to back it up.
"The 41% increase in accuracy of the CI can have a positive impact such as reducing false imprisonments" is an assertion considering you stated it also increases the likelihood of inaccurate information.
thank you for looking through and editing it, i appreciate it!
the evidence is backed up as it not being a realistic method to use in the point, waste of time and resources for police as they require specialist training especially if only two elements are useful
the increase in inaccurate information is for the ECI, the 41% Increase is for the CI
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest

How did The Student Room help you with your university application?

Talking to current university students (18)
19.15%
Talking to peers going through the same thing (32)
34.04%
Speaking to student ambassadors from the universities (5)
5.32%
Speaking to staff members from universities (2)
2.13%
Using the personal statement builder, library or helper service (9)
9.57%
Reading articles about what steps to take (18)
19.15%
Learning about/speaking to Student Finance England (4)
4.26%
Something else (tell us in the thread) (6)
6.38%

Watched Threads

View All