wearing clothing that matches the inaccurate descrip-
tion are at heightened risk of both apprehension and
false identification. Suspects in showups wearing dis-
tinctive clothing (e.g., shirts or jackets with logos) are
at greater risk of false identification due to clothing
bias than those wearing common clothing (e.g., plain
white T-shirts).
To protect a showup from clothing bias, the suspect
should not wear clothes that match the description of
the perpetrator’s clothing. Sometimes it is not possible
to change a suspect’s clothing for showups, (e.g.,
when they are conducted live at the scene of a crime).
In this case, the clothing of suspects could be covered
in some way, such as having a blanket covering their
body, so as to prevent their clothing from being a cue
to the witness. However, this method has not been
tested, so its effects on identification decisions are
currently not known.
Conviction of innocent people for crimes can be the
result of clothing bias during identification procedures.
Identifications should be based on recognition of a per-
son, not the clothing they are wearing. Clothing bias is
a concern for the three commonly used methods of
identification: mug shot, lineup, and showup.Michelle I. Bertrand, Jennifer L. Beaudry,
Jamal K. Mansour, and R. C. L. LindsaySee also Estimator and System Variables in Eyewitness
Identification; Identification Tests, Best Practices in;
Lineup Size and Bias; Mug Shots; Showups;
Simultaneous and Sequential Lineup PresentationFurther Readings
Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Dupuis, P. R. (2006).
Show-ups: The critical issue of clothing bias. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 20,1009–1023.
Lindsay, R. C. L., Nosworthy, G. J., Martin, R., &
Martynuck, C. (1994). Using mug shots to find suspects.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,121–130.
Lindsay, R. C. L., Wallbridge, H., & Drennan, D. (1987). Do
the clothes make the man? An exploration of the effect of
lineup attire on eyewitness identification accuracy.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 19,463–478.COGNITIVEINTERVIEW
Eyewitness information is the key element in solving
many crimes, yet the police are often poorly trained inconducting information-gathering interviews, and they
make avoidable mistakes. To rectify this situation,
Ronald Fisher and Edward Geiselman developed the
Cognitive Interview (CI) procedure to collect informa-
tion from cooperative witnesses. The CI techniques are
based on scientific principles of cognitive and social
psychology and are intended to facilitate witness mem-
ory and communication between the witness and the
interviewer. Laboratory and field tests have shown that
the CI increases considerably the amount of informa-
tion obtained from witnesses while maintaining high
accuracy. This entry describes the core elements of the
CI, empirical tests to validate the procedure, and its
various applications and limitations.
Police investigators depend heavily on eyewitness
evidence to solve crimes, and they often bemoan the
fact that witnesses do not provide as much information
as the police expect. Some of this cannot be controlled,
as when crimes occur quickly or under poor lighting
conditions. Nevertheless, the police do have some con-
trol over witness recollection, specifically by the way
they conduct interviews. Because many police investi-
gators receive minimal training on how to conduct
investigative interviews with cooperative witnesses,
they conduct interviews intuitively and make avoidable
errors. Studies of police interviews show that they
(a) ask too many closed-ended questions (e.g., How
tall was the robber?) and too few open-ended questions
(e.g., Describe the robber.), (b) often interrupt wit-
nesses in the middle of their narrative descriptions, and
(c) frequently ask leading questions.
To improve police interviewing procedures, Fisher
and Geiselman developed an interview procedure that is
based primarily on scientific, laboratory research in cog-
nitive psychology (hence the name Cognitive Interview)
and social psychology. The CI attempts to enhance wit-
ness recall by addressing three integral components
of the interview: (a) developing effective social dynam-
ics between the police interviewer and the witness,
(b) enhancing the witness’s memory retrieval and gener-
ally facilitating the witness’s and the interviewer’s
thought processes, and (c) facilitating communication
between the witness and the interviewer. The following
is a thumbnail sketch of the CI’s core principles.Social Dynamics
As in all small groups, the exchange of information
depends on how psychologically comfortable the
group members are with one another and each person’s
expectations of his or her role in the group.Cognitive Interview——— 95C-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:41 PM Page 95