Remembering remotely:would video-mediation impair witnesses' memory reports?

Witnesses often experience lengthy delays prior to being interviewed, during which their memories inevitably decay. Video-communication technology - favored by intergovernmental organizations for playing larger roles in judicial processes - might circumvent some of the resourcing problems that can exacerbate such delays. However, whereas video-mediation might facilitate expeditious interviewing, it might also harm rapport-building, make witnesses uncomfortable, and thereby undermine the quality and detail of their reports. Participants viewed a crime film and were interviewed either one day later via video-link, one day later face-to-face, or 1-2 weeks later face-to-face. Video-mediation neither influenced the detail or the accuracy of participants' reports, nor their ratings of the quality of the interviews. However, participants who underwent video-mediated interviews after a short delay gave more accurate, detailed reports than participants who waited longer to be interviewed face-to-face. This study provides initial empirical evidence that video-mediated communication (VMC) could facilitate the expeditious conduct of high-quality investigative interviews. © 2013 © 2013 Taylor & Francis.

Recall, verbatim memory and remembered narratives

Memory is central to investigative interviews with witnesses and suspects, yet decades of research have shown that remembering is subject to constructive and reconstructive processes that can adversely impact the reliability of accounts that are elicited at interview. In this chapter we first outline research concerning our memory for events (‘episodic memory’) before moving on to discuss the ways in which our attempts to validate and communicate those memories can bias what is eventually reported. We then focus on some of the implications this can have for investigative interviews, specifically the problem of ‘skill fade’ in interviewing, the impact of implicit beliefs about memory and issues surrounding the reliability of recollections of direct speech. We conclude that appropriately structuring the retrieval context is the key to achieving best memory evidence.