Interview styles, adult’s recall and personality in investigative interview settings: Mediation and moderation effects

Figures & data

Table 1. The individual variables that made up a humanitarian rapport-orientated (eight items) and a dominant non-rapport orientated (nine items) approach, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha showed good internal consistency, .89 and .84, respectively

Humanitarian rapport-orientated approach		Dominant non-rapport-orientated approach
1.	Interviewer acted calmly and allowed time to comment	1.	Interviewer was aggressive
2.	Interviewer showed an obliging manner	2.	Interviewer acted in a hurry and provided no time for reflection
3.	Interviewer showed personal interest and tried to create a personal conversation	3.	Interviewer showed deprecation
4.	Interviewer showed empathy	4.	Interviewer was nonchalant
5.	Interviewer expressed a positive attitude towards you as a human being	5.	Interviewer showed a condemning attitude
6.	Interviewer was cooperative	6.	Interviewer was brusque and obstinate
7.	Interviewer was helpful	7.	Interviewer was impatient
8.	Interviewer was friendly	8.	Interviewer was unfriendly
		9.	Interviewer expressed a negative attitude

Table 2. Bivariate correlations in Interview II (N = 127), between the rapport index^a (n = 63) and the non-rapport index^b (n = 64), and defined memory subcategories, including total memory (the sum of all correct recall) and false total memory (confabulated recall; the sum of all confabulated recall)

	Total memory	Central visual memory	Decision & action memory	Peripheral memory	False total memory	False central visual memory	False peripheral memory	Rapport index	Non-rapport index
Total memory
Central visual memory	.703**
Decision & action memory	.764**	.456**
Peripheral memory	.840**	.405**	.413**
False total memory	.165	.178*	.184*	.066
False central visual memory	−.041	−.064	.113	−.121	.698**
False peripheral memory	.250**	.282**	.171	.169	.879**	.271**
Rapport index	.309**	.289**	.266**	.230**	.137	−.048	.216*
Non-rapport index	−.268**	−.378**	−.327**	−.067	−.225*	−.067	−.258**	−.714**

Note: ^a = interviewer demeanour shown in the humanitarian rapport-orientated approach (eight items), ^b = interviewer demeanour shown in the dominant non-rapport-orientated approach (nine items).

* p < .05 and ** p < .01.

Figure 1. A conceptualisation of the proposed simple moderation model.

Figure 2. Indirect effect of the interview approach on the number of reported central visual memories through the humanitarian rapport index.

Note: * p < .05, ** p < .01, and *** p < .001.

Figure 3. Indirect effect of the interview approach on the number of reported central visual memories through the dominant non-rapport index.

Note: ** p < .01 and *** p < .001.

Figure 4. Indirect effect of the interview approach on the number of reported decision and action memories through the dominant non-rapport index.

Note: * p < .05 and *** p < .001.

Figure 5. Estimated conditional means of the number of reported confabulated memories reported by interviewees as moderated by the FFM factor openness to experience at low, mean, and of high levels in interview II, with a humanitarian rapport-orientated and dominant non-rapport-orientated approach, respectively.