Professor of Applied Cognitive Psychology, University of Portsmouth

Lorraine Hope is Professor of Applied Cognitive Psychology at the University of Portsmouth. She holds degrees from Lancaster, Bristol and Aberdeen universities and is a member of the UK Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats (CREST). Her work focuses on the performance of human cognition in applied contexts, including memory and decision-making under challenging conditions.

Over the past 15 years, her research has resulted in the development of innovative tools and techniques, informed by psychological science, for eliciting accurate and detailed information and intelligence in security, policing and intelligence contexts.  Working with national and international collaborators, Professor Hope has secured competitive funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, British Academy, Royal Society, Australian Research Council, Home Office and national police forces. 

She has published widely on memory and information elicitation topics and speaks regularly at academic and practitioner conferences. She is an invited member of the Executive Board of the International Investigative Interviewing Research Group (iIIRG), an elected member of the Governing Board of the Society for Applied Research on Memory and Cognition (SARMAC), Associate Editor of British Psychological Society journal Legal and Criminological Psychology and Consulting Editor for the American Psychological Association Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.

Personal webpage

Recent publications

Hope, L., Blocksidge, D., Gabbert, F., Sauer, J. D., Lewinski, W., Mirashi, A. & Atuk, E. (In press). Memory and the Operational Witness: Police officer recall of firearms encounters as a function of active response role. Law and Human Behavior.
Hope, L. (2016). Evaluating the effects of stress and fatigue on police officer response and recall: A challenge for research, training, practice and policy. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5, 239-245.
Sauer, J., & Hope, L. (2016). Effects of divided attention at study and reporting procedure on regulation and monitoring for episodic recall. Acta Psychologica, 169, 143-156
Gabbert, F., Hope, L., Carter, E. & Boon, R (2015). Communicating with witnesses: The role of initial accounts during investigative interviews. In G. Oxburgh, T. Grant, T. Myklehust, B. Milne (Eds.) Communication in Investigative and Legal Contexts: Integrated Approaches from Forensic Psychology, Linguistics and Law Enforcement. John Wiley & Sons.
Nash, R., Wheeler, R. L. & Hope, L. (2015). On the persuadability of memory: Is changing people's memories no more than changing their minds? British Journal of Psychology, 106, 308-326.
Vrij, A., Mann, S., Jundi, S., Hillman, J., & Hope, L. (2014). Detection of Concealment in an Information-Gathering Interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 936-944.
Vrij, A., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2014). Eliciting Reliable Information in Investigative Interviews. Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences (PIBBS), 1, 129-136.
Hope, L., Gabbert, F., Fisher, R. P. and Jamieson, K. (2014), Protecting and Enhancing Eyewitness Memory: The Impact of an Initial Recall Attempt on Performance in an Investigative Interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 304–313.
Hope, L., Eales, N. and Mirashi, A. (2014), Assisting jurors: Promoting recall of trial information through the use of a trial-ordered notebook. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19, 316–331.
Hope, L. (2013). Interviewing in Forensic Settings. In D. S. Dunn (Ed.) Oxford Bibliographies in Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press
Hope, L., Mullis, R. & Gabbert, F. (2013) Who? What? When? Using a timeline technique to facilitate recall of a complex event. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2, 20-24.
Hope, L., Gabbert, F & Fraser, J. (2013). Post incident conferring by law enforcement officers: Do discussions affect beliefs and accuracy? Law & Human Behavior. 37, 117-27.
Jundi, S., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S. & Hillman, J. (2013) Establishing Evidence through Undercover & Collective Intelligence Interviewing. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 19, 297-306.
Hope, L., Lewinski, W., Dixon, J., Blocksidge, D. & Gabbert, F. (2012). Witnesses in action: The effect of physical exertion on recall and recognition. Psychological Science, 23, 386-390.

More from Lorraine...




Memory at the Sharp End: The Costs of Remembering With Others in Forensic Contexts

In many applied contexts where accurate and reliable information informs operational decision‐making, emergency response resource allocation, efficient investigation, judicial process, and, ultimately, the delivery of justice, the costs of unfettered conversational remembering can be high. To date, research has demonstrated that conversations between co‐witnesses in the immediate aftermath of witnessed events and co‐witness retellings of witnessed events often impair both the quality and quantity of information reported subsequently. Given the largely negative impact of conversational remembering on the recall of both individual witnesses and groups of witnesses in this context, this review explores the reasons why these costs occur, the conditions under which costs are exacerbated, and how, in practical terms, the costs can be reduced in order to maximize the accuracy and completeness of witness accounts.

(From the journal abstract)

Lorraine Hope, and Fiona Gabbert. 2018. ‘Memory at the Sharp End: The Costs of Remembering With Others in Forensic Contexts’. Topics in Cognitive Science:

Authors: Lorraine Hope, Fiona Gabbert
Facilitating recall and particularisation of repeated events in adults using a multi-method interviewing format

Reports about repeated experiences tend to include more schematic information than information about specific instances. However, investigators in both forensic and intelligence settings typically seek specific over general information. We tested a multi-method interviewing format (MMIF) to facilitate recall and particularisation of repeated events through the use of the self-generated cues mnemonic, the timeline technique, and follow-up questions. Over separate sessions, 150 adult participants watched four scripted films depicting a series of meetings in which a terrorist group planned attacks and planted explosive devices. For half of our sample, the third witnessed event included two deviations (one new detail and one changed detail). A week later, participants provided their account using the MMIF, the timeline technique with self-generated cues, or a free recall format followed by open-ended questions. As expected, more information was reported overall in the MMIF condition compared to the other format conditions, for two types of details, correct details, and correct gist details. The reporting of internal intrusions was comparable across format conditions. Contrary to hypotheses, the presence of deviations did not benefit recall or source monitoring. Our findings have implications for information elicitation in applied settings and for future research on adults’ retrieval of repeated events.

(From the journal abstract)

Kontogianni, F., Rubinova, E., Hope, L., Taylor, P. J., Vrij, A., & Gabbert, F. (2021). Facilitating recall and particularisation of repeated events in adults using a multi-method interviewing format. Memory, 29(4), 471–485.

Authors: Feni Kontogianni, Lorraine Hope, Paul Taylor, Aldert Vrij, Fiona Gabbert
Tracking the truth: The effect of face familiarity on eye fixations during deception

In forensic investigations, suspects sometimes conceal recognition of a familiar person to protect co-conspirators or hide knowledge of a victim. The current experiment sought to determine whether eye fixations could be used to identify memory of known persons when lying about recognition of faces. Participants’ eye movements were monitored whilst they lied and told the truth about recognition of faces that varied in familiarity (newly learned, famous celebrities, personally known). Memory detection by eye movements during recognition of personally familiar and famous celebrity faces was negligibly affected by lying, thereby demonstrating that detection of memory during lies is influenced by the prior learning of the face. By contrast, eye movements did not reveal lies robustly for newly learned faces. These findings support the use of eye movements as markers of memory during concealed recognition but also suggest caution when familiarity is only a consequence of one brief exposure.

(From the journal abstract)

Millen, A. E., Hope, L., Hillstrom, A. P., & Vrij, A. (2017). Tracking the truth: The effect of face familiarity on eye fixations during deception. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006), 70(5), 930–943.

Authors: Aldert Vrij, Anne Hillstrom, Lorraine Hope

Back to top