“Blind” interviewing: Is ignorance bliss?

References

• Ask, K., & Granhag, P. A. (2005). Motivational sources of confirmation bias in criminal investigations: The need for cognitive closure. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 2, 43–63. doi:10.1002/jip.19
   Google Scholar
• Cantlon, J., Payne, G., & Erbaugh, C. (1996). Outcome-based practice: Disclosure rates of child sexual abuse comparing allegation blind and allegation informed structured interviews. Child Abuse and Neglect, 20, 1113–1120. doi:10.1016/0145-2134(96)00100-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson, K. A., & Russo, J. E. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 91–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifford, B. R., & George, R. (1996). A field evaluation of training in three methods of witness/victim investigative interviewing. Psychology, Crime & Law, 2(3), 231–248. doi: 10.1080/10683169608409780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory enhancing techniques in investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Raymond, D. S. (1987). Critical analysis of police interviewing techniques. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 15, 291–297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. P., & Schreiber, N. (2007). Interview protocols for improving eyewitness memory. In M. P. Toglia, J. D. Red, D. F. Ross, & R. C. L. Lindsay (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. 1: Memory for events (pp. 53–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Garrioch, L., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (2001). Lineup administrators’ expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 299–315. doi:10.1023/A:1010750028643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman, G. S., Sharma, A., Thomas, S. F., & Considine, M. G. (1995). Mother knows best: Effects of relationship status and interviewer bias on children's memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 195–228. doi: 10.1006/jecp.1995.1038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greathouse, S. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2009). Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 70–82. doi: 10.1007/s10979-008-9136-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haw, R. M., & Fisher, R. P. (2004). Effects of administrator contact on eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1106–1112. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, C., Memon, A., & McGeorge, P. (2008). The role of confirmation bias in suspect interviews: A systematic evaluation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 357–371. doi:10.1348/135532507X238682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirn Mueller, D., Schreiber Compo, N., Molina, J., Bryon, A., & Pimentel, P. S. (2015). Productive and counter-productive interviewing techniques: Do law enforcement investigators know the difference? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21, 295–308. doi: 10.1037/law0000047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Idaho v. Wright, 497 U.S. 805. (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Innocence Project. (2015, May 10). Retrieved from http://www.innocenceproject.org/casesfalseimprisonment
   Google Scholar
• International Association of the Chiefs of Police National Law Enforcement Policy Center. (2010). Eyewitness identifications. Retrieved from http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/issues/72013/pdfs/IACP_Policy_Center_Eyewitness_Identification_Concepts_and_Issues_Paper.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kassin, S. M., Goldstein, C. C., & Savitsky, K. (2003). Behavioral confirmation in the interrogation room: The dangers of presuming guilt. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 187–203. doi:10.1023/A:1022599230598
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malloy, L. C., & Quas, J. A. (2009). Children's suggestibility: Areas of consensus and controversy. In K. Kuehnle, & M. Connell (Eds.), The evaluation of child sexual abuse allegations: A comprehensive guide to assessment and testimony (pp. 267–297). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, M. R., McAuliff, B. D., Bull Kovera, M., & Cutler, B. (1999). Double-blind photoarray administration as a safeguard against investigator bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 940–951. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.6.940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poole, D. A., & Lamb, M. E. (1998). Investigative interviews of children: A guide for helping professionals. London: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rassin, E., Eerland, A., & Kuijpers, I. (2010). Find the evidence: An analogue study of confirmation bias in criminal investigations. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 7, 231–246. doi:10.1002/jip.126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rivard, J. R., & Schreiber Compo, N. (2015). ‘Blind’ interviewing in the field: Forensic interviewers’ practices, attitudes, and perceptions. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference of Psychology and Law, San Diego, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R. (1994). Interpersonal expectancy effects: A 30 year perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3(6), 176–179. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770698
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 377–145. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00075506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schreiber Compo, N., Hyman Gregory, A. R., & Fisher, R. P. (2012). Interviewing behaviors in police investigators: A field study of a current U.S. sample. Psychology, Crime and Law, 18(3–4), 359–375. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2010.494604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 14, 148–162. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(78)90021-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Technical Working Group: Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178240.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wason, P. C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273–281. doi:10.1080/14640746808400161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells, G. L., & Luus, C. A. E. (1990). Police lineups as experiments: Social methodology as a framework for properly-conducted lineups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 106–117. doi:10.1177/0146167290161008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells, G. L., Memon, A., & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Eyewitness evidence: Improving its probative value. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 45–75. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00027.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22. doi:10.1023/A:1025750605807
   Google Scholar
• Suggestive eyewitness identification procedures. In B. L. Cutler (Ed.), Conviction of the innocent: Lessons from psychological research (pp. 125–148). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar