Equipping witnesses with transferable skills: the Self-Administered Interview <sup>©</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Self-Administered Interview© (SAI) is a novel investigative interview tool with potential practical benefits. Research revealed that the SAI increases the recall of correct information without a decrease in accuracy. In addition, it seems to prevent forgetting. Participants who had completed the SAI after viewing an event remembered more correct details following a delay than participants who did not have this early recall opportunity. The current study examined whether the beneficial effects of the SAI go beyond the well-established testing effect. Does the SAI make a good witness for one event or for a better witness in general? If the SAI provides general skills, its effects may transfer at least partially to a new event. Two groups of participants watched an event followed by SAI or free recall (FR) instructions. After a one-week delay participants were presented with a second event and received FR instructions. In addition to replicating the SAI effect, experienced SAI participants recalled more correct details for the second event than inexperienced individuals. The findings suggest that the SAI equips witnesses with transferable skills they can use during future retrieval of new events.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".