Self-generated cues: the role of cue quality in facilitating eyewitness recall
| Date | 18 July 2024 |
| Pages | 164-175 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-05-2024-0036 |
| Published date | 18 July 2024 |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology,Criminal psychology,Sociology,Sociology of crime & law,Deviant behaviour,Public policy & environmental management,Policing,Criminal justice |
| Author | Rebecca L. Wheeler-Mundy,Fiona Gabbert,Lorraine Hope |
Self-generated cues: the role of cue
quality in facilitating eyewitness recall
Rebecca L. Wheeler-Mundy, Fiona Gabbert and Lorraine Hope
Abstract
Purpose –Witness-led techniques, informed by theory, have been recognized as best practice for
eliciting informationfrom cooperative eyewitnesses. This study aims totest a self-generated cue (SGC)
mnemonic groundedin memory theory and explore the impact of three SGC mnemonics on subsequent
recallperformance.
Design/methodology/approach –Participants (N¼170) witnesseda live staged event and reported
their recall using an SGC mnemonic (keywords only, event line or concept map) or control technique
(other-generated cues or free recall only). These mock witness accounts were compared in terms of
correctand incorrect details reported.
Findings –Fewer correct details were reported in the other-generated cue condition compared to the
SGC event line (p¼0.018) and SGC concept map (p¼0.010). There were no significant differences
between free recall alone and any other condition. The number of inaccurate details reported did not
differ between conditions(p¼0.153). The findings suggest that high-quality freerecall instructions can
benefit recall performanceabove generic cues (e.g. other-generated cues)but using SGCs to support a
structuredrecall (e.g. concept map or event line) may offeran additional recall benefit.
Originality/value –The findings support previous research that SGCs benefit recall beyond other-
generated cues. However,by comparing different cue generation techniquesgrounded in the literature,
we extend such findings to show that SGC generation techniques are not equally effective and that
combiningSGCs with structured recall is likelyto carry the greatest benefit torecall.
Keywords Self-generated cue, Cognitive mnemonic, Informatio n elicitation, Witness-led recall,
Retrieval cue, Cue quality
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In countries with well-developed investigative procedures, the cogni tive interview (Geiselman
et al., 1986) is generally recognized as the “gold-standard” interviewing app roach for eliciting
“best evidence” from cooperative adult witnesses (Fish er and Ashkenazi, 2023;Memon et al.,
2010). Each mnemonic technique included in the cognitive interview is underp inned by two
key memory principles. First, effective retrieval cues overlap considerably with en coded
information (Geiselman et al., 1986;Tulving and Thomson, 1973). Second, as a memory trace
comprises multiple items of related information, different retri eval cues can facilitate the recall
of different items of information (Geiselman et al., 1986). Following these principles, we tested
a self-generated cue (SGC) mnemonic similarly grounded in memory theory, with the aim of
providing an intuitive witness-led method of facilitating reliabl e eyewitness recall.
An SGC is a memory cue generated according to the individual’s representation of a target
memory. Cues generated in this way are therefore unique to the individual in their ability to
functionally represent the critical properties of the target memory (Ma
¨ntyla
¨, 1986;Ma
¨ntyla
¨
and Nilsson, 1983;Wheeler and Gabbert, 2017). As such, an SGC is a cue actively
generated by the individual, representing the critical properties of the target memory, and
generated with the purpose of facilitating more complete retrieval of a target memory. For
Rebecca L. Wheeler-
Mundy is based at the
Department of Psychology,
Birmingham City University,
Birmingham, UK.
Fiona Gabbert is based at
the Department of
Psychology, Goldsmiths
University of London,
London, UK.
Lorraine Hope is based at
the Department of
Psychology, University of
Portsmouth, Portsmouth,
UK.
Received 2 May 2024
Revised 6 June 2024
Accepted 13 June 2024
This work forms part of the first
author’s PhD thesis. Financial
support was provided by a
grant made to the first and
second authors by the
Economic and Social Research
Council (award reference:
1466501) to fund the lead
author’s PhD research. The
authors are grateful to Iona
MacPherson for carrying out
pilot study data collection and
to Gloria Georgieva, Marton
Gaspar and Keon West for their
help in acting out the stimulus
event. The authors are also
grateful to Alex Lloyd and Eve
Twivy for help with coding, and
to Tim Valentine, Gordon
Wright, Sia
ˆn Jones and Sophie
von Stumm for comments on a
draft of this manuscript.
PAGE 164 jJOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY jVOL. 15 NO. 2 2025, pp. 164-175, ©Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829 DOI 10.1108/JCP-05-2024-0036
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting