“Tell me more about this…”: An examination of the efficacy of follow-up open questions following an initial account

Feni Kontogianni*, Lorraine Hope, Paul J. Taylor, Aldert Vrij, Fiona Gabbert

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In information gathering interviews, follow-up questions are asked to clarify and extend initial witness accounts. Across two experiments, we examined the efficacy of open-ended questions following an account about a multi-perpetrator event. In Experiment 1, 50 mock-witnesses used the timeline technique or a free recall format to provide an initial account. Although follow-up questions elicited new information (18–22% of the total output) across conditions, the response accuracy (60%) was significantly lower than that of the initial account (83%). In Experiment 2 (N = 60), half of the participants received pre-questioning instructions to monitor accuracy when responding to follow-up questions. New information was reported (21–22% of the total output) across conditions, but despite using pre-questioning instructions, response accuracy (75%) was again lower than the spontaneously reported information (87.5%). Follow-up open-ended questions prompt additional reporting; however, practitioners should be cautious to corroborate the accuracy of new reported details.

Original languageEnglish
JournalApplied cognitive psychology
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print/First online - 11 Apr 2020

Keywords

  • accuracy-informativeness trade-off
  • eliciting information
  • follow-up questions
  • timeline technique

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '“Tell me more about this…”: An examination of the efficacy of follow-up open questions following an initial account'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this