THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGY IN THE INVESTIGATION OF
CRIMINAL CASES
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
What is Forensic Psychology?
Psychology is the study of the human psyche, so in every human life, psychology tries to
explain the problems faced. Legal issues are no exception. In United States, psychology then
divides its field into 6 namely clinical, developmental, general and experimental psychology,
social psychology, educational psychology, industrial and organizational psychology. In fact,
in the United States, this division has become more than one 50 part, following the
increasingly complex problems faced by humans. One of them is problems in the field of law,
the part of psychology that deals with it is often known as forensic psychology. What is
forensic psychology?
The committee on ethical guidelines for forensic psychology (Putwain & Sammons, 2002)
defines legal psychology as all forms of psychological services conducted within the law.
Bartol & Bartol (in Wrightsman, 2001) stated that legal psychology can be divided into:
Studies/research related to the aspects of human behavior in the process of law (such as
witness recollection, jury/judge decision-making, criminal behavior)
A psychology profession that provides assistance in relation to the law. This profession
in America has been so developed, such as Theodore Blau, he is a clinical psychologist
who is a police consultant. His specialization is to determine the cause of death of a
person due to murdered or committed suicide. Ericka B. Gray is a psychologist in
charge of mediation, especially in civil cases. Before the case goes to court, the judge
usually sends the litigants to Gray to be able to mediate their case. John Stap is a social
psychologist, he works for lawyers. His job is as a judicial consultant, he will design
things that lawyers and their clients will do in order to win the case. Richard Frederic, is
an expert in prisoner rehabilitation. By looking at these professions, we can imagine
how psychologists play an important role in the American legal system.
So broad is the field of study of legal psychology that Blackburn (in Bartol & Bartol, 1994;
Kapardis, 1995) divides the field into three areas, psychology in law, psychology and law,
psychology of law. Psychology in law, is the practical application of psychology in the field of
law such as psychologists being invited to be expert witnesses in the judicial process.
Psychology and law, covers the field of psycho-legal research, namely research on
individuals related to the law such as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, defendants. Psychology of
law, the relationship between law and psychology is more abstract, the law as a determinant
of behavior. Issues studied include how society affects law and how law affects society.
This paper is one of the studies of legal psychology in the field of psychology and law,
because psychology seeks to explain the truth-seeking process in criminal investigations.
The Importance of (Police) Investigations in Criminal Cases
Moeljatno (1982) defines criminal law as the entire law applicable in a country, which
provides the basis and rules for :
▪
Determines which actions can be carried out, which are prohibited, which are
accompanied by threats or sanctions in the form of certain punishments for those who
violate these prohibitions.
▪
Determine when and in what cases those who have violated the prohibition can be
subject to or sentenced to the punishment as threatened,
▪
Determines in what way the imposition of punishment can be carried out if someone is
suspected of having violated the prohibition.
In order to implement criminal law, there are ways that must be taken so that legal order in
society can be upheld. These methods are referred to as criminal procedural law. The purpose
of criminal procedure law is to seek and obtain material legal truth, namely a truth that is as
complete as possible.
The completeness of a criminal case that applies the provisions of the criminal procedure law
honestly and precisely, with the aim of finding out who is the perpetrator who can be charged
with committing a violation of the law and then asking for an examination and decision from
the court to determine whether it is proven that a criminal offense has been committed and the
person charged is to blame (Ministry of Justice R.I, 1982).
In accordance with the Law of the Republic of United States No. 8 of 1981, the criminal
justice system in United States consists of the police, prosecutors, district courts and
correctional institutions as law enforcement officers. Investigations in this paper can be
conducted by the police, prosecutors and judges. However, the investigation process by the
police is an important phase, because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. It is
the investigator who first meets with suspects, witnesses and victims and asks them about the
events of the case. Mistakes in the investigation will have an impact on achieving the truth in
the criminal justice process at a later stage in the prosecutor's office or court. Often the police
use "violence" (physical or psychological) in their investigations, which can damage the
memories of witnesses, victims and suspects.
Understanding Human Cognitive Processes
Criminal investigations can be conducted on suspects, witnesses and victims by police,
prosecutors and judges. This paper focuses more on witnesses, although it does not rule out
the possibility that it can be used on victims and suspects. The criminal justice process relies
heavily on the results of witness investigations, because the police, prosecutors and judges do
not directly see the events of the case. Brigham and Wolfskeil (in Brigham, 1991) examined
that judges and juries in America put 90% trust in witness statements, even though many
studies have proven that the testimony given by witnesses is biased (Sanders & Warnick cited
by Sanders & Simmons, 1983; Goodman, Hahn, Loftus, & Yarmey cited by Fisher, et al,
1989). According to Penrod & Culter (in Costanzo, 2004) each year in America there are
nearly 4500 testimony errors. However, witnesses are human beings, so there are many things
that influence discrepancies between the testimony given and the actual facts. This
discrepancy may stem from (Ancok, 1995):
Witnesses' cognitive limitations in processing, recording and remembering
information
Bias in the perception of investigators in assessing the veracity of testimony
How to extract testimony by investigators
Kapardis (1997) states that the truth of testimony is influenced by three things, namely
attention, perception, memory. When a crime occurs, a lot of information enters the
cognition of the witness who saw the incident. Not only information about the perpetrator's
actions, but also the characteristics of the perpetrator and the situation at the time of the
incident also enter the witness's cognition. So much information comes in, that only a little is
recorded by the witness. There is an information selection process called attention. Solso
(1991) states that there are two theoretical models about attention, namely the switch model
proposed by Broadbent stating that the information that comes will be selected. Those that are
selected will be processed, while those that are not will be discarded. The second model is
proposed by Treisman, namely the attenuator model. All incoming information will be
processed, it's just that some are noticed and some are not. These two attention models have in
common that information will be selected when it enters cognition, it's just that the difference
is in information that does not pass the selection. if the switch model will be discarded, if the
attenuator model will be weakened.
The incoming information will also be given meaning by the individual, this process is
referred to as perception. The giving of meaning will be strongly influenced by the witness's
cultural background, age, expectations, emotions, and knowledge (Kapardis, 1997). Witnesses
who are having negative emotions towards the perpetrator will perceive negative things about
the perpetrator which are then stored in their memory. In relation to memory, the mental
processes that occur are (Brigham, 1991; Milne & Bull, 2000):
Encoding/acquisition phase, which is the process of how information enters memory. Not
every piece of information that is attended to is stored in memory, with much information left
unattended. In addition, not every piece of information is stored appropriately. Usually,
information that is information in accordance with the scheme of thought will be stored
appropriately but sometimes information that is completely opposite is also stored
appropriately (Hasti & Kumar cited by Brigham, 1991). Many factors affect the encoding
phase, including:
Witness/victim stress levels. Several studies have shown that stress can both increase and
decrease witness memory. Yuille & Cutshall's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) showed
homicide witnesses (high stress) had a truthfulness of testimony of 93% when interviewed 2
days after the incident. 4 months later the memory decreased to 88%. The presence of
weapons (pistols, other sharp weapons) used by the perpetrator also causes stress and reduces
the accuracy of witness memory, especially for perpetrators who carry weapons (Kramer,
Buckhout, Eigino in Milne & Bull, 2000). Other studies, Yuille & Cutshall; Courage &
Peterson (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found the opposite. Stressful events lead to increased
witness memory, as traumatic events cause witnesses/victims to focus attention on the event.
However, individual differences in witnesses, such as differences in the coping style of each
witness, will result in differences in the veracity of testimony.
▪
Violent events. Clifford & Scott (in Milne & Bull, 2000) found that witness memory is
better for non-violent events than for violent events.
▪
Attention. It has been mentioned above that information enters through selection. Not
all information is processed in cognitive. Information that passes this selection will be
encoded. Information that is encoded will be able to be reappeared. Attention is
influenced by knowledge, expectations, attitudes, experiences, interests and determines
which information is processed or not (Milne & Bull, 2000). Retrieval, which is the
process of information entering memory being brought up / recalled. Some factors that
affect the retrieval process are:
▪
Memory is constructive. If an individual sees an event then the encoded information is
the event added to the general information previously owned by the individual.
Therefore, it is not strange if the general information that has been owned by individuals
will have an influence on individuals when giving testimony (Milne & Bull, 2000).
▪
Inference. In giving testimony, witnesses often draw conclusions about the events they
experienced. Loftus and Palmer's research (in Milne & Bull, 2000) proved this. A group
of people were shown an accident through the medium of a movie. After that, they were
asked for the verb that best described the conditions they saw. Almost 2/3 of the
subjects chose the verb "collide" and these subjects when a week later were asked about
the accident and the researcher reminded them that last week they used the word collide
to describe the situation. As a result they stated that "there was broken glass" when in
fact there was no broken glass. This shows that witnesses often give inferences to the
verb collide that they themselves come up with. While in the group of subjects who
gave the description of the verb "to mash", no "glass was broken" appeared in the
second interview. Therefore, the investigator's questions play an important role because
they can influence the witness.
▪
Stereotypes. In understanding their environment, individuals often categorize (although
these categorizations are not necessarily correct). Categorizations about people are often
based on groupings of age, gender, race, appearance (Baron & Byrne, 1991; Brigham,
1991). For example, women are often judged as meek, not independent, not enthusiastic
(Zubaidah, Probowati, Sutrisno, 2007). In culture, Madurese people are often
considered rude and aggressive. This categorization will affect witness testimony. In
America, where there are many negative stereotypes against black groups, many
witnesses are biased by giving negative testimony against black suspects. The issue of
stereotyping was studied by Probowati (2005) and found that indigenous United States
judges have negative stereotypes towards ethnic Chinese defendants. Zubaidah,
Probowati, Sutrisno (2007) found that judges (both male and female) have a negative
stereotype towards female defendants by giving heavier sentences. Stereotyping also
occurs with witnesses.
▪
Emotional Condition. The emotional condition of the subject in addition to affecting
memory storage (encoding) also has an impact on retrieval. We often experience that in
an anxious condition facing an exam, a lot of material is forgotten (Holmes in Milne &
Bull, 2000). Yerkes - Dodson (in Brigham, 1991) states that witnesses in emotional
conditions (fear, anxiety, anger) will decrease the accuracy of their testimony.
The retention interval/stored, i.e. the storage process (this process can take a long time -
depending on how long it took for the witness to testify). The longer the process of storing a
memory, the more likely it is to be forgotten. Tulving (in Solso, 1991) also states that memory
can be divided into episodic memory and semantic memory. Episodic memory is a memory
that contains information and things related to events. Semantic memory is a memory of
words, concepts, rules and abstract ideas. Testimonial memory is episodic memory, and
according to Tulving, this type of memory is easily lost as new information comes in. The
longer the investigation of testimony, the more new information is present in the witness's
memory and this decreases the accuracy of the testimony.
Engineering Investigation Taking into Account Psychological Principles
From the above, it is known that witness memory is vulnerable. There are many factors that
influence the process of storage and reappearance, so it is actually difficult to obtain 100%
truthful testimony. In order to reduce the factors affecting the vulnerability of witness
memory, techniques are needed to maximize witness memory. Two frequently discussed
investigative interviewing techniques are (Kapardis, 1997; Milne & Bull, 2000, Costanzo,
2004):
Hypnosis
Hypnosis has actually been used by people for a long time, but because there are many
controversial cases, this technique is rarely used. In United States, there are not many
psychologists who are experts in using hypnosis techniques. Perhaps because Freud's
approach is not very developed in United States Psychology, although in Germany Freud's
followers are actually quite developed. Therefore, it is also rare for psychologists to use this
technique.
Hypnosis can be used to improve the memory of witnesses and victims. Hypnosis techniques
ask the witness/victim to relax, then he/she is in a focus state and becomes very obedient to
the instructions of the person hypnotizing him/her. The instruction given is to ask the
witness/victim to recall the events he experienced. He/she is guided to pay attention to details
such as the license plate number of the car or the face of the perpetrator. Witnesses usually
remember more information when they are hypnotized than when they are not hypnotized.
This condition is referred to as hypnotic hypernesia (a condition that is the opposite of
amnesia) (Costanzo, 2004).
The bad thing with hypnosis is that although more information comes out, sometimes this
information is not necessarily the right information. Sometimes the information that appears is
influenced by the imagination and fantasy of the witness. Some studies prove that hypnotic
techniques do not always produce accurate information in testimony (Steblay & Bothwell in
Costanzo, 2004). The problem is, even though the imaginative information was obtained
through hypnosis, the witness is very sure that it is true.
Although this hypnotic technique is not always used with every witness, it is still used when
information about an incident is not progressing. Such as an incident in Chowcilla, California
(Costanzo, 2004) where a school bus was taken hostage by a group of masked people, and
then released the victims after getting money. The witnesses (bus driver and 26 children) did
not provide meaningful information about the incident so that the perpetrators of this incident
could not be traced. When hypnosis techniques were applied to the bus driver, he was able to
remember the license plate number of the perpetrator's vehicle. And when tracked down by
the police, it turned out to be true.
Witnesses/victims who are very emotional (embarrassed, angry) often also lose their
memories, and say they forgot. With hypnosis techniques, he feels free and can bring his
memory back (Kebbell & Wagstaff in Costanzo, 2004). So hypnosis by experts can
sometimes be done to find information in the witness's memory that cannot be found with
other techniques.
Cognitive interview
This technique was created by Ron Fisher and Edward Geiselman in 1992. The aim is to
improve the retrieval process which will increase the quantity and quality of information by
making the witness/victim feel relaxed, and cooperative (Costanzo, 2004; Milne & Bull,
2000). This technique also seeks to reduce the suggestion effect that occurs in hypnotic
techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Fisher (in Costanzo, 2004) and Milne & Bull (2000) state that there are 5 stages in cognitive
interviewing. These stages are:
▪
Stage I, is the stage of establishing rapport with the witness/victim so that he/she is not
anxious, feels comfortable, and makes the witness/victim also become more
concentrated. At this early stage, the witness/victim is asked to tell the story of the
incident without being interrupted by the interviewer. The aim is that there is no
suggestive effect from the interviewer.
▪
Phase II, event interview similarity, is to restore the witness's memory of the event.
He/she is asked to close his/her eyes and imagine the event. He is asked to imagine what
he saw, heard, thought and felt (as relevant) at the time.
▪
Phase III, probing (extracting information in more detail) on the description and things
conveyed by the witness. The aim is to gain confidence in relevant matters related to the
events experienced by the witness. Then the event is recalled in a different order, first
from beginning to end. Then from the end to the beginning.
▪
Phase IV. Witnesses are asked to see the event from different perspectives. For
example, from the perspective of the perpetrator or the perspective of the victim. These
results are recorded and double-checked with the witness if there might be something
that feels wrong or inaccurate.
▪
Stage V. The witness is asked to recall other new information that may not have been
elicited. This can be stimulated with detailed questions about faces, clothes, accents,
cars. For example, who do you think the perpetrator looks like? The witness's answer
may mention the name of a famous person, such as Saiful Jamil or Pong Harjatmo.
Actually, that's not what's important, but the witness needs to be asked in more detail.
Why does it look like Saiful Jamil? Are there any special characteristics? Is there any
special impression that you get? This way the witness will be asked to recall more
detailed information about the perpetrator that he may not have done.
Overall, this technique requires the witness/victim to be relaxed, provides multiple
opportunities for the witness to recount events and does not use leading or pressure questions
(Fisher in Costanzo, 2004). Police are usually trained to conduct interrogations using pressure
techniques and leading questions. This makes it difficult for police to change the way they
interrogate witnesses/suspects to cognitive interviewing. Yet many studies have shown that
cognitive interviewing techniques can improve the accuracy of testimony without suggesting
the witness (Costanzo, 2004). Geiselman (in Fisher, Geiselman, Amador, 1989) found that
cognitive interviewing techniques produced 25-35% more and accurate testimony than
standard police interviewing techniques. Mantwill, Kohnken & Ascermann (1995) found
cognitive interviewing yielded more information than structured interviews.
Currently, police in the UK are routinely trained in cognitive interviewing techniques, while
police in the US, although not routinely, use these techniques (Costanzo, 2004).
Conclusion
The criminal justice process requires information from witnesses, victims and suspects,
because neither the police, prosecutors nor judges see the events themselves. However, police,
prosecutors and judges must make decisions based on the information available. Therefore,
the role of witnesses is important. In the concept of psychology, witness memory is very
vulnerable, because many factors cause the information to be less accurate. Psychological
techniques are needed to reduce the information bias that occurs. Two commonly used
techniques are hypnosis and cognitive interviewing. To be able to perform these two
techniques requires skills, this is where forensic psychology is needed to provide training in
these skills. These techniques are especially needed when extracting initial testimony (in the
police), because that is when the Investigation Report is prepared. What makes it difficult is
that the police have been accustomed to conducting interrogations with leading and pressing
questions.
