Reading Comprehension

PT150 · S1 · P2 · Q8 The Cognitive Interview

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

When interviewing witnesses to a crime, police interviewers seek to maximize the amount of information that a cooperating eyewitness can give them so that they can generate leads to follow, confirm or disconfirm alibis, and so forth.

Topic

Three police interview techniques for getting more information from cooperative eyewitnesses: the cognitive interview, hypnosis, and instructed eye-closure.

Framework

Problem/Solution. P1–P3 lay out two existing techniques and what's wrong with each; P4 introduces a third option that solves the problems.

Main Point

Instructed eye-closure is the ideal interview technique because it captures the recall benefits of the cognitive interview without the training overhead, and it works on every witness — unlike hypnosis, which has accuracy and applicability problems. Most Valuable Sentence:

P1: Setting up the problem

Police want to maximize what cooperative witnesses can recall. The cognitive interview is one technique designed to do that.

P2: The cognitive interview — effective but complex

Combines cognitive recall techniques with social-psychology communication skills. It increases details recalled without lowering accuracy, but it's complex, takes long training, and even trained officers tend to drift from the procedure.

P3: Hypnosis — simpler, but less accurate

Less complex than the cognitive interview. But overall accuracy is not improved (and sometimes drops), it produces a "false confidence" effect (witnesses believe their incorrect details too), and not every witness is even susceptible to hypnosis.

8.

The author refers to "alibis" (first sentence of the passage) primarily in order to

  1. highlight a positive contribution made

    Outside the Support Window

    The correct answer is going to be reinforcing what was said in this first sentence, and psychological research isn't brought up until the 2nd paragraph. We know that the author mentioned alibis as an example of why police interviewers who are interviewing witnesses seek to extract as much information as possible.

    0% picked this

  2. exemplify the kind of information

    Witnesses, not Suspects

    First of all, this sentence we're being tested on is about interviewing witnesses to crimes, not the suspect of a crime. Secondly, the sentence is saying that the police are hoping to get as much information from this witness so that they can see whether it confirms or disconfirms the suspect's supposed alibi. But this sentence isn't saying they're hoping to actually elicit alibis from these witnesses.

    51% picked this

  3. Correct

    point to a use to

    Why this is right

    This is written intentionally weird, because LSAC's intention was to trap people with (B), but this ends up being the closest match we're offered for what we were looking for: "an example of why police interviewers who are interviewing witnesses seek to extract as much information as possible" To what use would police interviewers put this information that they get from a witness? 1. they would use it to generate leads to follow 2. they would use it to confirm or disconfirm alibis

    Skill tested: Local Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    48% picked this

  4. contrast the concerns of police

    Outside the Support Window

    The correct answer is going to be reinforcing what was said in this first sentence, and psychologists aren't brought up until the 2nd paragraph. We know that the author mentioned alibis as an example of why police interviewers who are interviewing witnesses seek to extract as much information as possible.

    0% picked this

  5. illustrate the complexity of the

    Outside the Support Window

    The correct answer is going to be reinforcing what was said in this first sentence, and the cognitive interview is brought up in the 2nd sentence as "One method" of trying to extract information from a witness. The reference to "alibis" was about the goal of extracting information. It didn't have anything to do with one particular method or another, and it certainly didn't offer any commentary on the complexity of the cognitive interview.

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free