1. Hypnosis and Memory Triple Threat Sheila Krogh-Jespersen Victoria Cox Alicia Briganti Triple Threat Sheila Krogh-Jespersen Victoria Cox Alicia Briganti

2. Outline:  The Basics  Traditional vs. Sociocognitive Perspectives  Enhancing Retrieval and the Cognitive Interview  The Basics  Traditional vs. Sociocognitive Perspectives  Enhancing Retrieval and the Cognitive Interview

3. Kihlstrom:  Hypnosis=1 person(subject) acting on suggestions from another person(hypnotist) for imaginative experiences involving alterations in cognition and voluntary action

4. Posthypnotic Amnesia:  Inability to remember events/experiences which occurred during hypnotism  Temporary  Functional amnesia  Impairs explicit memory  Inability to remember events/experiences which occurred during hypnotism  Temporary  Functional amnesia  Impairs explicit memory

5. Hypnotic Agnosia:  Disrupts a subject’s semantic/procedural memory  Forget the number 12  Meaningless word  Disrupts a subject’s semantic/procedural memory  Forget the number 12  Meaningless word

6. Hypnotic Hypermnesia:  Performance enhancement  Increase False Recollections  Cognitive Interview  Performance enhancement  Increase False Recollections  Cognitive Interview

7. Memory Enhancement and Hypnosis:  Hypnotism increases the number of accurate recollections but….  It also increase the number of new errors  Hypnotism increases the number of accurate recollections but….  It also increase the number of new errors

8. Hypnotic Age Regression:  Ablation  Reinstatement  Revivification  Ablation  Reinstatement  Revivification

9. In the Court and Clinic:  Mock organized-crime execution  Cognitive Interview  Mock organized-crime execution  Cognitive Interview

10. Why?  Hypnosis is still used to recover “repressed” memories  Hypnosis impairs explicit memory  Public perceptions of the efficacy of hypnosis may increase the likelihood of memory distortions  Hypnosis is still used to recover “repressed” memories  Hypnosis impairs explicit memory  Public perceptions of the efficacy of hypnosis may increase the likelihood of memory distortions

11. The Hypnotic Minidrama

12. The Two Perspectives  Traditional –  Hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness that enables people to have unusual experiences.  Sociocognitive –  Hypnosis refers to the historically rooted conceptions of situations that are labeled “hypnotic.”  Traditional –  Hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness that enables people to have unusual experiences.  Sociocognitive –  Hypnosis refers to the historically rooted conceptions of situations that are labeled “hypnotic.”

13. Components of Hypnosis  Phrasing of the hypnotist  Suggestion that specific behavioral responses are emerging automatically  Phrasing of the hypnotist  Suggestion that specific behavioral responses are emerging automatically

14.  Do you buy it? The Social Construction of Hypnosis…

15. Challenges and Fallacies  Behavior of “the hypnotized” and “the requested” does not differ  Increased motivation makes increased suggestibility  Cognitive processes in simulators and non-simulators  Behavior of “the hypnotized” and “the requested” does not differ  Increased motivation makes increased suggestibility  Cognitive processes in simulators and non-simulators

16. Dramatic behaviors  See no evil, hear no evil  Stiff arm syndrome  See no evil, hear no evil  Stiff arm syndrome

17. Are they so dramatic?  Hitting someone?  Taking off clothes?  Running a mile, or 2, or 3?  Hitting someone?  Taking off clothes?  Running a mile, or 2, or 3?

18. Hypnotic Amnesia  Automatically occurring  Actively forgetting  Socially responding  Automatically occurring  Actively forgetting  Socially responding

19. Posthypnotic Responding  Implant cues to automatically elicit a suggested response  Context and belief dependent  Implant cues to automatically elicit a suggested response  Context and belief dependent

20. Hypnosis Creates…  Human Automatons

21. Enhancing Retrieval and The Cognitive Interview

22. ACCORDING TO JONES Psychotherapists should:  Educate clients  Choose methods judiciously (Jones, 1999) Psychotherapists should:  Educate clients  Choose methods judiciously (Jones, 1999)

23. EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY  Police techniques  Hypnosis  Cognitive Interview  Police techniques  Hypnosis  Cognitive Interview

24. COGNITIVE INTERVIEW  4 Basic principles: 1. Event-interview similarity 2. Focused retrieval 3. Extensive retrieval 4. Witness-compatible questioning  4 Basic principles: 1. Event-interview similarity 2. Focused retrieval 3. Extensive retrieval 4. Witness-compatible questioning  Temporal sequence: 1. Introduction 2. Free recall 3. Probing stage 4. Review 5. Conclusion (Fisher, Geiselman, & Amador, 1989)

25. FIELD TEST  16 detectives (1 trained group; 1 untrained group)  Preliminary interviews  Training  Post-training interviews  Analysis  16 detectives (1 trained group; 1 untrained group)  Preliminary interviews  Training  Post-training interviews  Analysis

26. EXPERIMENT  51 non-students watched videotapes of a crime  Interviewed 48 hours later either by standard interview or cognitive interview  4 retrieval mnemonics and 5 memory- recovery techniques used in C.I. condition  51 non-students watched videotapes of a crime  Interviewed 48 hours later either by standard interview or cognitive interview  4 retrieval mnemonics and 5 memory- recovery techniques used in C.I. condition (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, and Holland, 1986)

27. RESULTS VariableC. I.S. I. No. Correct*41.6735.58 No. Incorrect8.578.61 No. Confabulated1.882.17 Question time (min)30.1129.10 No. questions asked*76.7393.06 No. leading questions asked 0.150.83  More correct items recalled  No difference in # of incorrect items recalled  Fewer questions asked; more efficient

28. HYPNOSIS VS. the COGNITIVE INTERVIEW  C.I. elicited 33.4% more information than hypnosis (Fisher, Geiselman, Raymond, Jurkevich, & Warhaftig, 1987)  C.I. does not lead to increased error rate  C.I. lessens subjects’ suggestibility to leading questions (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, & Holland, 1986)  C.I. elicited 33.4% more information than hypnosis (Fisher, Geiselman, Raymond, Jurkevich, & Warhaftig, 1987)  C.I. does not lead to increased error rate  C.I. lessens subjects’ suggestibility to leading questions (Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, & Holland, 1986)

29. FOOD FOR THOUGHT…  Should the Cognitive Interview be incorporated into the standard training program of all investigative interviewers?  Would it be as effective if the witness is a child?  Would it still be as effective after a long delay? If the event was very traumatic?  Should the Cognitive Interview be incorporated into the standard training program of all investigative interviewers?  Would it be as effective if the witness is a child?  Would it still be as effective after a long delay? If the event was very traumatic?