The Essential Attributes of an Interviewer - Essay Example

The Essential Attributes of an Interviewer The increase in the socio-economic aspects and health care in present day scenario has led to the increment in the number research. There are approximately 500 research projects reported to indicate the inadequacy of the ongoing, natural and objective approach of research to comprehend the disease and simultaneously are not able to find out people’s requirement of health facilities. Hence, the organizations are now trying to authenticate the research by applying the new techniques. There are studies related to mental health, socio-economic and personnel factors. Organizations conducting the researches, involved in planning of interviews and designing of the questionnaires. With an effective discussion, limitations of interviews are confined to avoid any unfairness; as the interview is a vital instrument behind any research or investigation. Therefore an interviewer requires endowing himself with all the attributes necessary to get the proper information. An interviewer needs a proper study of the subject of research, its background and proper understanding of the objective of interview, in a proper way. There are several techniques applied to conduct an authentic interview. The case may vary from a crime to patient in a mental hospital. The body language, way of communication and approach applied matters a lot in the quality of the interview. (Ritchie, Lewis 2003). An interviewer should always keep in mind, the importance of qualitative value of the research which can be achieved only through primary data collection method; which is totally based on the interview of the native. More exact information you derive from the interviewee, more the research will be authentic. The subject of the study requires a particular kind of approach to make the research fruitful, avoiding any bias. The design of questions planned may have socio-economical, natural, physical and psychological approaches, depending on the objective of the research. Selection of the field for the research, making a team, and a good fieldwork with historical, social and psychological analysis is necessary, before designing the questions for the interview. The interview should be able to reach in depth of an individual, acquiring all the required information from him. Selection of the place of interview and the kind of questions, affects the psychology of the individual which may influence in the spontaneity of the information he is giving. Therefore, to get the same in a proper way, the individual should be provided with a contented environment, which encourages him to narrate his story or the incident he has witnessed. As soon as the process of data collection through an authentic interview is completed; a qualitative analysis of collected information is required, to give a proper shape to final research report. Among several approaches of interviewing and researching, the most successful one is a psychological approach. As the information is acquired from a human beings, who are psychological in nature; treating them psychologically, would certainly help gain more factual information than any other approaches. Here we will discuss about the methods of psychological approach of interview. This technique of interview consists of a non-accusatory interview combining both investigative and behavior-provoking questions. This technique of interview has three elements: Factual analysis, interviewing, and investigation. Besides being distinct in their process these elements have a common objective to help the innocent and identify the offender. Interrogating that individual becomes an important task to find out the reality. This technique is useful in extracting information from reluctant suspects. Interviews and investigation both are supported by investigative findings; therefore, a proper analysis of facts can help the interviewer in following ways: Recognize appropriate questioning planning. Increase the possibility to recognize the offender through the interview. unlikely suspects Develop probable leads In behavior analysis, provoking questions are asked to draw out the symptoms from the person who indicates the truth. Interrogation, on the other hand, is a straight forward and direct; where the investigator remains strong with the view that the individual is guilty. There are less question- answers and more of investigators’ narrations. The actual objective here is to understand the behavior of the individual and makes him gradually more relaxed about what they have done. This is accomplished by providing a psychological reason to their behavior. For example, the question in this method is asked in this way: Did you plan this or it happened at once? As the individual reminds about the incident, the interviewer would catch him immediately with another psychological question to bring him towards confession. There are several steps involved in the interview process which are as follows: 1. Directly confronting the individual would help him acknowledge that, his guilt has been already proved. So, offer the person an opportunity to clarify why the fault took place. 2. Putting, the blame on someone else, try to justify the crime and study the point where he is most responsive. 3. Encourage the individual to accept the crime. 4. Try to move towards the confession. 5. Emphasize sincerity to ensure that the suspect is sympathetic. 6. Move the discussion towards offering options. If the suspect cries, infer guilt. 7. Ask the individual to two optional questions, one more socially acceptable than the other. Whichever the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted. 9. Make the Individual accept the guilt before the witness and make the confession valid. Now we will discuss about the other method of interview, i.e. Cognitive interview: The cognitive interview is a method of interview, in which the sufferer informs, what they remember from the incident. Using this method cognitive interview makes the witness aware of all the events that have happened. Cognitive interview consistently enhances the process of memory recovery and has been found to draw out memories without generating inaccurate information. Becoming increasingly popular with use in police investigations, training programs and a manual, this method of interview has been given a proper shape. In 1975, the Rand Corporation completed a study on criminal-investigations. The study found that the testimony of an eyewitness was an important determinant in whether the case was solved or not. (Rand 1975). However, it has been found that many eyewitness reports were unreliable as they could be incomplete, partially constructed and vulnerable to suggestions during the interviewing process. Studies have shown that interviewing techniques such as asking leading questions and close ended questions can influence the responses given by the interviewee. (Loftus 1975). Many of the techniques were explored by Elizabeth Loftus, a researcher who studied eyewitness statements, the misfortune effects, and false memories. ‘Cognitive interviews were developed in 1984 by researchers Geisel man, Fisher and their colleagues in response to the ineffective police interviewing techniques used in the past. Their goal was to suggest methods that increased the accuracies of eyewitness statement. They found that when participants were trained in memory retrieval techniques, the participants recalled more correct information about an event that occurred on a questionnaire’. They based the techniques on four general memory retrieval rules based on the supposition that memory traces are usually complex with various kinds of information. (Geiselman, Fisher, Firstenberg, Hutton, Sullivan, Avetissain , Prosk 1984). In 1985 Geiselman, Fisher and their colleagues MacKinnon and Holland further showed that the cognitive interview had ecological validity by having participants watch videos of replicated brutal crimes. The original concept of the cognitive interview was revised in 1987 by Fisher, Geisel man and their colleagues. The revisions to the original cognitive interview included the idea of structuring the interview to be more similar in temperament with how the brain retrieves memories. The revised version of the cognitive interview showed an increase of 45 percent in correct information retrieved. (Fisher, Geiselman, Raymond, Jurkevich, Warhaftig 1987) To conduct the cognitive interviews; the interviewer has to follow following guidelines: 1. Mental reinstatement of environmental and personal contexts: The participant is asked to mentally imagine the incident. The interviewer may ask them to shape an imaginary picture of the witnessed event. The imagination may include the placement of properties. The purpose of this process is to increase the feature overlap between initial witnessing and subsequent retrieval contexts. (Memon, Bull 1991). 2. In-depth Reporting: The interviewer encourages the reporting of every detail, regardless of how nonessential it may seem to the main incident. (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, Holland 1985). This step is important for two reasons. First, the participant may only initially report what information they assume to be important regardless of the fact that they are unaware of what information will have value. Second, recalling partial details may lead to subsequent recall of additional relevant information. (Memon, Bull 1991). 3. Describing the event in several orders: The participant creates a narration of the event. He or she is then prompted to start the narrative, from a point that is different than their initial starting point. This process may provide a new perspective of the event which subsequently provides an opportunity for new information to be recalled. 4. Reporting the event from different perspectives: The participant is asked to report the event from several different perspectives; like that of another witness. If the participant witnessed a robbery, the interviewer may ask ‘What do you think the witness saw?’ and then ask for the participant’s perspective. 5. Supplementary Techniques: These techniques are used to draw out exact items from the narrative that the participant provides about what they witnessed. ( Memon, Bull 1991). Cognitive theory states that cues presented at the time of retrieval will be more effective in facilitating recall when the cues have some degree of contextual overlap to cues that were present at the time of encoding. (Tulving & Thomson 1973) What Makes an Effective Interviewer? One of the main goals of the interviewer is to maximize memory retrieval from a detailed level of representation and to minimize memory retrieval from the general level. In a study done by Fisher, Geiselman, and Amador; several suggestions are provided for the interviewer to use when they feel appropriate in order to maximize memory retrieval. Based on what is known about the brainwashing specificity rule, the interviewer should encourage the witness to revisit their state of mind at the time of the event. (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, Holland 1985). The interviewer should make every effort to assist the witness to remain in a state of concentration to avoid any disruption that may lead to disturbed retrieval process. (Geiselman, Fisher, Mac, Holland 1985). To encourage the witness participation, the interviewer should use open ended questions. 1. The series of events witnessed will be stored differently for each participant. 3. The effective interviewer makes every effort to modify the interview to each witness. Interviewers should not be rigid and alter their approach to meet the needs of each witness rather than use rigidity. Uniform style of questioning thereby forces the witness to adjust their mental expression to the interviewers questions. (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, Holland 1985) Cognitive interviewing as a whole has been a successful and consistent method in drawing out accurate memory recall both in interviewers and witnesses of a crime. Another advantage of the cognitive interview aside from its success in enhancing recall is that, it can be learned and applied with a minimal amount of training. (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, Holland 1985). Several studies of the cognitive interview have provided results that support the effectiveness of this relatively new method of interviewing. The cognitive interview has proven to be a beneficial method for memory enhancement in police officers, children, adults and older adults when recalling the events. The cognitive interview is carried out in a series of several steps. First, an introduction is made which establishes a relationship between the witness and the interviewer. At this point the interviewer introduces the four retrieval rules to the witness and asks him to use these techniques. The interviewer then gives the witness an opportunity to provide an uninterrupted narration of what they saw. During this time, the interviewer is able to construct a strategy for carrying out the remainder of the interview. The interviewer will then guide the witness through several memory representations, after which the interviewer will review the witness memories. The completion of this last step is followed by the completion of the interview. The interview is formally ended, but with a suggestion that will extend its practical use. (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, Holland 1985). It has been demonstrated that cognitive interviews have clear advantages over traditional police interviews. Field tests have shown that police officers trained in cognitive interviewing benefit from gathering more detailed information from witnesses in investigative scenes. Remarkably, interviewer’s memories are also enhanced through the interviewing process. (Memon, Meissner, Fraser 2010). One particular study showed that 25-35% more information is extracted when using cognitive interviews compared to standard police interviews.( Fisher, Geiselman, Amador 1989) Another study showed that cognitive interviewing proved to significantly increase the amount of correct information recalled in a group of 7 to 9 year olds, however, this groups amount of confabulation also increased. (Memon, Wark,Bull & Koehnken 1997). Child participants have been able to provide interviewers with concrete responses, which have proven to be both correct and detailed when given a cognitive interview. Researchers have recently reported that cognitive interviewing leads children to report detailed information that is particularly relevant to police investigations. (Fisher, Geiselman, Amador 1989). Research involving adults and the use of the cognitive interview has found that there is a significant increase in correct recall of details using the cognitive interviews than other types of interviews with fewer incorrect details supported. In one successful study, witnesses were asked to draw a detailed sketch of what they witnessed while conversing, which proved to be as effective as asking witnesses to mentally restore the situation. (Memon, Meissner, Fraser 2010) Hence, attributes of a good interviewer depends on the in depth study of the case, which enables him to prepare the qualitative questionnaire that can acquire exact information from the individual; and doing a qualitative data analysis is another fundamental necessity of a good interview. Questioning on the basis of a psychological ground helps the most to derive authentic information that can lead to genuine result. As the interviewer plays a key role in giving a research, an authentication, therefore one needs to feel the responsibility, to establish a suitable environment for every interview, making the work fruitful. References Fisher, R. P. , Geiselman, R. E., Raymond, D.S., Jurkevich, L. M., Warhaftig, M. L1987, ‘Enhancing enhanced eyewitness memory: Refining the cognitive interview’. Journal of Police Science and Administration, vol. 15, pp. 291-297. Fisher, R.P., Geiselman, R.E., Amador, M 1989, ‘Field test of the cognitive interview: Enhancing the recollection of actual victims and witnesses of crime’. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.74, no. 5, pp. 722-727. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., Firstenberg, I. Hutton, L. A., Sullivan, S. J., Avetissain, I. V., Prosk, A. L 1984, ‘Enhancement of eyewitness memory: An empirical evaluation of the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science and Administration,vol. 12, no.1, pp.74-80. Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., MacKinnon, D. P., & Holland, H. L1985, ‘Eyewitness memory enhancement in the police interview: Cognitive retrieval mnemonics versus hypnosis, Journal of Applied Psychology,vol.70, no.2, pp. 401-412. Loftus, E. F 1975, ‘Leading questions and eyewitness report’, Cognitive Psychology, vol.7, pp. 560-572. Ritchie, J, & Lewis, J 2003, ‘Qualitative research practice’, Sage, London. Memon, A., Wark, L., Bull, R. & Koehnken, G 1997, ‘ Isolating the effects of the cognitive interview techniques’, British Journal of Psychology, vol. 88, no. 2, pp.179-198. Memon, A., Bull, R 1991, ‘The cognitive interview: Its origins, empirical support, evaluation and practical implications, Journal of Community and Applied Psychology, vol. 1, pp. 1-18. Rand Corporation, 1975, ‘The criminal investigation process’, Rand Corporation Technical Report, Vol. 1, no. 3. Tulving, E. Thomson, D. M 1973, ‘ Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory, Psychological Review, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 352-373. Memon, A., Meissner, C. A., Fraser, J 2010, ‘ The cognitive interview: A meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years’, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 340-372. Fisher, R.P., Geiselman, R.E., and Amador, M 1989, ‘Field test of the cognitive interview: Enhancing the recollection of actual victims and witnesses of crime’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.74, no.5, pp. 722-727. Read More