Overview
Investigative Interviewing: Witnesses is a core unit in the Graduate Certificate in Applied Forensic Psychology. It is designed to introduce you to the key concepts, debates, and theories that underpin the interviewing of witnesses in criminal investigations. In the unit you will study the history of eyewitness testimony research, the development of research methods, and many of the leading interviewing techniques and protocols. Special focus will be on the interviewing of children, credibility assessment tools and those with 'vulnerabilities' (e.g., mental illness, intellectual disability, illiteracy, drug dependence, cultural and religious factors, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people). It will feature engaged teaching and learning, with real-world content, designed to prepare you to work with community based organisations, or in private practice. For example, the teaching will include practical skills training in interviewing techniques and feature an authentic assessment: a face-to-face interview.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2020
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student email.
Students appreciated the support offered during the semester and flexibility over assignment deadlines.
Support will continue to be offered throughout the semester and deadlines can be renegotiated.
Feedback from Student email
The weekly lectures were well received, with students commenting positively on the lecturing style, and choice of case materials with in-depth critical analysis of those materials.
The popular positive lecturing style will be continued, as will the popular in-depth analysis of key cases.
- Evaluate the efficacy of major models of investigative interviewing
- Apply creative strategies to design an effective interviewing strategy
- Investigate and synthesise complex case information involving a child witness.
N/A
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Essay - 30% | |||
| 2 - Case Study - 30% | |||
| 3 - Laboratory/Practical - 40% | |||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Knowledge | |||
| 2 - Communication | |||
| 3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills | |||
| 4 - Research | |||
| 5 - Self-management | |||
| 6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility | |||
| 7 - Leadership | |||
| 8 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| 1 - Essay - 30% | ||||||||
| 2 - Case Study - 30% | ||||||||
| 3 - Laboratory/Practical - 40% | ||||||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 6th Edition (APA 6th edition)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
k.j.burke@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction to eyewitness testimony (Part 1)
Chapter
Bornstein, B. H., & Meissner, C. A. (2008). Basic and applied issues in eyewitness research: A Münsterberg centennial retrospective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(6), 733-736. doi:doi:10.1002/acp.1478
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Introduction to eyewitness testimony (Part 2)
Chapter
Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness-testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1546-1557. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.12.1546
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Policies and procedures (Part 1)
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Policies and procedures (Part 2)
Chapter
Crown Prosecution Service. (2011). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures. London: UK Government. Retrieved from https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/legal_guidance/best_evidence_in_criminal_proceedings.pdf
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Vulnerable witnesses (Part 1)
Chapter
Goodman, G. S. (1984). Children's testimony in historical perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 40(2), 9-31. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1984.tb01091.x
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Vulnerable witnesses (Part 2)
Chapter
Brown, D. A., & Lamb, M. E. (2015). Can children be useful witnesses? It depends how they are questioned. Child Development Perspectives. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12142
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Memory and suggestibility (Part 1)
Chapter
Snook, B., & Keating, K. (2011). A field study of adult witness interviewing practices in a Canadian police organization. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16(1), 160-172. doi:10.1348/135532510X497258
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Memory and suggestibility (Part 2)
Chapter
Bruck, M., & Ceci, S. J. (1999). The suggestibility of children's memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 419-439. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.419
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Memory and suggestibility (Part 3)
Chapter
Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Amador, M. (1989). Field test of the cognitive interview: Enhancing the recollection of the actual victims and witnesses of crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(5), 722-727. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.5.722
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Conclusions: Eyewitness testimony in 2020 (and beyond)
Chapter
Benton, T. R., Ross, D. F., Bradshaw, E., Thomas, W. N., & Bradshaw, G. S. (2006). Eyewitness memory is still not common sense: comparing jurors, judges and law enforcement to eyewitness experts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(1), 115-129. doi:10.1002/acp.1171
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Essay
In this assessment task you will propose two recommendations for interviewing policy. The policy may relate to your own workplace or any situation in which investigative interviews are conducted. You should support your recommendations with a short empirically-based rationale for the policy, drawing on the psychological research literature. Each recommendation and supporting rationale should be approximately 500 words (1000 words total for the assignment).
Week 5 Friday (10 Apr 2020) 11:45 pm AEST
Submit via Moodle
Week 7 Monday (27 Apr 2020)
Returned via Moodle
Abstract (10 marks)
- Concise and accurately summarises the topic addressed
Body (70 marks)
- On topic, concise and develops argument
- Research led arguments
- Referenced where appropriate (in-text)
- Evidence of critical evaluation and discussion of material
References (10 marks)
- 10 or more, majority peer-review journal articles
- Correct APA format in-text and reference list
- In-text and reference list match exactly
Style/Presentation (10 marks)
- Grammar, spelling and sentence structure
- Overall readability, flow of writing
- Appropriate use of sub-headings
Full details of length, formatting, etc. can be found on Moodle.
- Evaluate the efficacy of major models of investigative interviewing
- Apply creative strategies to design an effective interviewing strategy
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Research
- Self-management
2 Case Study
Week 8 Friday (8 May 2020) 11:45 pm AEST
Submit via Moodle
Week 9 Monday (11 May 2020)
Return via Moodle Gradebook
Abstract (10 marks)
- Concise and accurately summarises the topic addressed
Body (70 marks)
- Includes a case summary
- On topic, concise and develops argument
- Research led arguments concerning how the interview(s) could have been improved
- Referenced where appropriate (in-text)
- Evidence of critical evaluation and discussion of material
References (10 marks)
- Correct APA format in-text and reference list
- In-text and reference list match exactly
Style/Presentation (10 marks)
- Grammar, spelling and sentence structure
- Overall readability, flow of writing
- Appropriate use of sub-headings
Full details of length, formatting, etc. can be found on Moodle.
- Evaluate the efficacy of major models of investigative interviewing
- Investigate and synthesise complex case information involving a child witness.
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
3 Laboratory/Practical
This assignment is based on an original study by Hughes and Grieve (1980) which attempted to show how children will try to make sense of any question, no matter how strange it may be. Children, aged 5 and 7, were asked "bizarre" or "conceptually ill-formed" questions like, "Is milk bigger than water?", and "Is red heavier than yellow?" Although these questions were apparently meaningless, the children would typically give answers. In this practical assignment, you will conduct four interviews (ideally, two children and two adults) replicating the Hughes and Grieve study, and in addition, introduce an experimental manipulation (e.g., different interviewing instructions, changing the physical environment) in which you will attempt to reduce the apparent suggestibility of children and adults.
Week 12 Friday (5 June 2020) 11:45 pm AEST
Submit via Moodle
Exam Week Monday (15 June 2020)
Return via Moodle Gradebook
Abstract (10 marks)
- Concise and accurately summarises the study
Introduction (20 marks)
- On topic, concise and develops argument
- Research led arguments
- Referenced where appropriate (in-text)
Method (15 marks)
- Appropriate subheadings for each section (e.g., Participants)
- Contains sufficient information about the methodology for another researcher to repeat the research project
Results (15 marks)
- Demonstrates clear testing of the research aims/hypotheses
- Data and analyses are reported
Discussion (20 marks)
- Addresses all research aims/hypotheses
- Interpretation of results is logical and well situated in the literature
- Results are discussed in the light of the literature from the introduction
- Contains discussion of the application/relevance of the theoretical models/frameworks with respect to the results obtained
- Addresses limitations and implications of the research and recommendations for future research
- Provides thoughtful and considered argument
References (10 marks)
- Correct APA format in-text and reference list
- In-text and reference list match exactly
Style/Presentation (10 marks)
- Grammar, spelling and sentence structure
- Overall readability, flow of writing
- Uses table/s to summarise key data (optional)
- Appropriate use of sub-headings
Full details of length, formatting, etc. can be found on Moodle.
- Apply creative strategies to design an effective interviewing strategy
- Investigate and synthesise complex case information involving a child witness.
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
- Leadership
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
