바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1229-0653

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.30 No.3

Citation Share

SAI(Self-Administered Interview)가 사건회상 정확성에 미치는 효과

SAI(Self-Administered Interview) effect on the accuracy of recalling the event

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2016, v.30 no.3, pp.63-75
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.3.004
김미영 (경기대학교)
김시업 (경기대학교)
김미영, & 김시업. (2016). SAI(Self-Administered Interview)가 사건회상 정확성에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 30(3), 63-75, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.3.004

초록

범죄사건 수사에서 목격자의 진술은 가장 중요한 정보 중 하나이다. 목격자들로부터 정확한 정보를 확보하기 위해서는 가능한 사건 발생 후 빠른 시간 내에 면담을 해야 한다. 그러나 이는 경찰 인력과 시간이 요구되므로 현실적으로 실행하기 어렵다. 이로써 시간지연으로 인한 망각이나 왜곡 등이 개입되어 목격자의 기억을 훼손시킨다. 이를 해결하기 위해서는 사건 목격과 보고 사이의 시간 간격을 좁히는 것이 필요하다. 따라서 최소한의 경찰 인력으로 다수의 목격자 진술을 신속하고 정확하게 확보할 수 있는 도구를 개발하는 것이 중요하다. 본 연구는 이와 같은 목적으로 개발된 SAI(Self-Administered Interview)가 목격자 진술 회상에 효과가 있는지를 알아보고자 하였다. 이를 위해 강원도 소재 K대학교 재학생 235명을 대상으로 폭행 영상을 보여준 직후 SAI와 수기용 경찰면담질문지를 실시하였고, 1주일 후 정보의 양과 질에 어떤 변화가 나타나는지를 알아보았다. 그 결과, 사건 목격 직후 SAI를 실시하는 것이 1주일 후에도 사건 정보의 양과 정확성을 유지시키는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 이 결과의 시사점 및 후속 연구에 대해 논의하였다.

keywords
SAI, Cognitive Interview, Police investigation, Police Interview, Eyewitness memory, Witness statement, SAI, 인지면담, 경찰수사, 수사면담, 목격자 기억, 목격자 진술

Abstract

Witnesses’ statement is one of the most important sources of information in the investigation of crimes. In order to obtain the most informative and correct statement, witnesses should be interviewed as soon as possible after the incident. However, all too often this is not achieved, largely due to demands on police resources and times. Therefore, the memory of the witness may not be perfectly preserved due to its forgetting or distortions by time delay. In order to solve this problem, it is necessary to narrow down the time between the event and the actual interview. Thus, it is better to develop a tool to collect the accurate information from witnesses speedily with the less police resource. By this reason, SAI(Self-Administered Interview) has been developed and now in use. The present study is to look into SAI and to find out if it is effective on the witness to recall the event accurately. In order to explore the changes of the information quality and quantity, SAI or Standard Police Questionnaire was conducted to 235 university freshmen in Kangwon province right after watching a violent video clip and conducted again one week later. The result showed that the group who was conducted SAI maintained the accurate information even one week after the event than the group who was conducted Standard Police Questionnaire. We further discussed the practical implications of the present findings.

keywords
SAI, Cognitive Interview, Police investigation, Police Interview, Eyewitness memory, Witness statement, SAI, 인지면담, 경찰수사, 수사면담, 목격자 기억, 목격자 진술

참고문헌

1.

권영민 (2004). 아동의 사건 회상에서 ‘모델링’ 인지 면접의 효과. 가톨릭대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문.

2.

김미영 (2006). 효율적인 수사면담을 위한 단축형 인지면담 개발. 경기대학교 대학원 석사학위 논문.

3.

김미영, 김경하, 전우병, 김시업 (2004). 인지면담기법이 아동과 성인의 사건회상 정확성에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지:사회및성격, 18(2), 137-151.

4.

김시업, 문옥영 (2010). 단축형 인지면담이 노인목격자의 회상에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지:사회및성격, 24(4), 95-112.

5.

Aldridge, N. C. (1999). Enhancing children’s memory through cognitive interviewing: An assessment technique for social work practice. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 16(2), 101-126.

6.

Ayers, M. S., & Peder, L. M. (1998). A theoretical review of the misinformation effect: Predictions from an activation-based memory model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 1-21.

7.

Bjork, R. A. (1988). Retrieval practice and the maintenance of knowledge. In M. M. Gruneberg, R. E. Morris & R. N. Skyes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues: Vol. 1. Memory in everyday life (pp. 396-401. New York: Wiley.

8.

Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated classroom setting. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 514-527.

9.

Clarke, R., Dando, C., Gabbert, F., & Hope, L., (June, 2011). Toward assisting older witnesses and victims to give best evidence. Paper accepted for the International Investigative Interviewing Research Group(IIIRG), Dundee, Scotland.

10.

Ebbesen, E. B., & Rienick, C. B. (1998). Retention interval and eyewitness memory for events and personal identifying attributes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 745-762.

11.

Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

12.

Fisher, R. P. (1996). Implications of output-bound measures for laboratory and field research in memory. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 197.

13.

Gabbert, F., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2009). Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. Law and Human Behavior, 33(4), 298.

14.

Gabbert, F., Hope, L., Fisher, R. P., & Jamieson, K. (July, 2008). Preserving memory accuracy over a delay with the use of a self-administered interview. Paper presented at the European Association of Psychology and Law, Maastricht, Netherlands.

15.

Gabbert, F., Hope, L., Fisher, R. P., & Jamieson, K. (March, 2010). In the field: Trials of self-administered interview recall tool with witnesses to serious crime. Paper presented at the Meeting of the American Psychology and Law Society, Vancouver, Canada.

16.

Gabbert, F., Hope, L., Fisher, R. P., & Jamieson, K. (2012). Protecting against misleading postevent information with a self-administered interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(4), 568-575.

17.

Geiselman, R. E., Fisher, R. P., Firstenberg I., Hutton, L. A., Sullivan, S. J., Avetissian, I. V., & Prosk, A. L. (1984). Enhancement of eyewitness memory : An empirical evaluation of the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 12, 74-80.

18.

Hope, L., Gabbert, F., & Fisher, R. P. (July, 2009). The Self-Administered Interview(SAI): Capturing eyewitness accounts at the scene of an incident. Society of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Kyoto, Japan.

19.

Hope, L., Gabbert, F., & Fisher, R. P. (2011). From laboratory to the street: capturing witness memory using the self administered interview. Legal and criminological psycholgy, 16(2). 211-226.

20.

Koutstaal, W., Schacter, D. L., Johnson, M. K., & Galluccio, L. (1999). Facilitation and impairment of event memory produced by photograph review. Memory & Cognition, 27, 478-493.

21.

McDaniel, M. A., Kowitz, M. D., & Dunay, P. K. (1989). Altering memory through recall: The effects of cue-guided retrieval processing. Memory & Cognition, 17, 423-434.

22.

Memon, Meissner, Christian, Fraser, Joanne(2010). The Cognitive Interview: A meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol 16(4), 340-372.

23.

Milne, R., & Bull, R. (1999). Investigative interviewing-psychology and practice. John Wiley & Sons, LTD.

24.

Paterson, H. M., Eijkemans, H., & Kemp, R. L. (2015). Investigating the Impact of Delayed Administration on the Efficacy of the Self-Administered Interview. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), 307-317.

25.

Pickel, K. L. (2004). When a lie becomes the truth: The effects of self-generated misinformation on eyewitness memory. Memory(Hove, England), 12, 14-26.

26.

Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1980). SAM: A theory of probabilistic search of associative memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.). The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 14), (pp. 207-262). New York: Academic Press.

27.

Roediger, H. L. III, & Neely, J. H. (1982). Retrieval blocks in episodic and semantic memory. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 36, 213-242.

28.

Roos of Hjelmsäter, E., Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). The Self-Administered Interview: a means of improving childres eyewitness performance?. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(10), 897-911.

29.

Rubin, D. C., & Wenzel, A. E. (1996). One hundred years of forgetting: A quantitative description of retention. Psychological Review, 103, 743-760.

30.

Shaw, J. S., III. Bjork, R. A., & Handal, A. (1995). Retrieval-induced forgetting in an eyewitness- memory paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 249-253.

31.

Turtle, J. W., & Yuille, J. C. (1994). Lost but not forgotten details: Repeated eyewitness recall leads to reminiscence but not hypermnesia. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 260-271.

32.

Tversky, B., & Marsh, E. (2000). Biased retallings of events yield biased memories. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 1-38.

33.

Yuille, J. C., & Cutshall, J. L. (1986). A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 291-301.

34.

Wilkinson, A. C., & Koestler, R. (1984). Generality of a strength model for three conditions of repeated recall. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 28, 43-72.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격

논문 투고 OA 정책