The quality and the quantity of information recalled by eyewitnesses during a criminal investigation is of crucial importance. To increase the volume of details recalled during an interview, the cognitive interview recommends using various retrieval strategies to enhance recall. We tested a new retrieval instruction, the open depth (OD) instruction. The efficacy of this new instruction was assessed with the number of unit of information and the accuracy rate. We also assessed the cost-and-benefit of this new instruction with measures of repetition. Students watched a video of a simulated robbery and participated later in face-to-face interviews. In Study 1 (N 060), the cognitive interview using the OD instruction increased recall compared to the interview using the change of perspective (CP) instruction, without affecting the accuracy rate. The redundancy rate was higher with the OD instruction than with the CP instruction. In Study 2 (N 040), the OD instruction generated more new information without affecting the accuracy rate than the interview using motivated recall (MR) instruction. The repeated information to new information ratio was lower with the OD instruction than with the MR instruction. The advantages of the OD instruction for investigative interviewing purposes are discussed.
International audienceThe use of nanotechnology (devices/materials composed of parts less than 10nanometres) in the development of new products is rapidly expanding.Industrialists and decision-makers consider nanotechnology to be the nextindustrial revolution, but fear they risk the same resistance to nanotechnologythat their counterparts experienced with genetically modified organisms (GMOs).Although risk perception studies have shown that perceived risk of GMOs isquite high compared to that related to nanotechnology, no study to date hasexplored a potential direct social representation link between the two. Thepresent study aims to fill that gap by comparing the social representations ofnanotechnology and GMOs among a population of non-experts. This study wasconducted with 282 students in human and social sciences and natural sciences.Using a free association task with the inductive words ‘nanotechnology’ and‘GMO (genetically modified organism)’, we identified the existing social representationsof the two based on a structural approach. While the representation ofGMOs is objectified in the field of agriculture, objectification for nanotechnologyseems to still be lacking, although its possible objectification likely lies incomputing and robotics. Our calculation of the rate of similarity of associativewords with nanotechnology and GMOs indicated no present, direct link betweentheir social representations. We discuss the possible evolution of the socialrepresentation of nanotechnology over time
Personalized medicine (PM) is increasingly becoming a topic of discussion in public health policies and media. However, there is no consensus among definitions of PM in the scientific literature and the terms used to designate it, with some definitions emphasizing patient-centered aspects and others emphasizing biomedical aspects. Furthermore, terms used to refer to PM (e.g., “pharmacogenomics” or, more often, “targeted therapies”) are diverse and differently used. To our knowledge, no study has apprehended the differences of definition and attitudes toward personalized medicine and targeted therapies according to level of familiarity with the medical field. Our cohort included 349 French students from three different academic fields, which modulated their familiarity level with the medical field. They were asked to associate words either to “personalized medicine” or “target therapies”. Then, they were asked to give an emotional valence to their associations. Results showed that nonfamiliar students perceived PM as more positive than targeted therapies (TT), whereas familiar students showed no difference. Only familiar students defined PM and TT with technical aspects such as genetics or immunology. Further studies are needed in the field in order to determine which other factors could influence the definitions of PM and TT and determine how these definitions could have an impact in a clinical setting.
Introduced in the middle of the 1980s, the cognitive interview intended to perfect the techniques of interviewing witnesses and victims of crimes and offences. Since then, numerous international researchers have found an interest in this technique. The major reason for its success within the scientific community is probably due to the scientific basis of its elaboration, referring to various models of memory. Among the potential users-mainly professionals of justice-its use is not systematic, even for those with extensive training. We can then question the adequacy of the cognitive interview in relation to the characteristics of a real forensic interview. First, we will present studies which have shown the utility of the cognitive interview while testing its reliability according to diverse characteristics of the situation of the interview, and according to the characteristics of witnesses. Then, we will question the costs and the compatibility of the cognitive interview with the various phases and objectives of an investigation. Moreover, we will question the usability of the cognitive interview, particularly its learnability, and then propose solutions to improve its usability. Finally, our conclusion will deal with the social acceptability of this interviewing technique by professionals. Questionner l'acceptabilité de l'Entretien cognitif pour améliorer son utilisation RÉSUMÉ L'entretien cognitif est une méthode d'audition des témoins et victimes de crimes et délits qui permet d'obtenir des témoignages plus exhaustifs et aussi exacts que ceux
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.