Artigo de revisão
ELICITATION IN THE MEDICAL-LEGAL INTERVIEW: LITERATURE REVIEW AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Como citar: Serra MF. ELICITATION IN THE MEDICAL-LEGAL INTERVIEW: LITERATURE REVIEW AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS. Persp Med Legal Pericia Med. Vol. 11, 2026; 260411.
https://dx.doi.org/10.47005/260411
Recebido em 20/12/2025
Aceito em 14/04/2026
The authors report no conflict of interest.
ELICITATION IN THE MEDICAL-LEGAL INTERVIEW: LITERATURE REVIEW AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Resumo
A entrevista médico-pericial é etapa central da prova técnica, sendo decisiva para a reconstrução fática e análise do nexo causal. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: Foi realizada revisão narrativa da literatura sobre elicitação e entrevistas forenses, com adaptação conceitual ao contexto pericial médico. RESULTADOS: A literatura demonstra que a forma de condução da entrevista influencia diretamente a confiabilidade do relato. DISCUSSÃO: Propõe-se a aplicação estruturada da elicitação como metodologia capaz de reduzir vieses cognitivos, linguísticos e motivacionais. CONCLUSÃO: A elicitação qualifica a entrevista pericial e fortalece a consistência técnica das conclusões.
Palavras Chave: Entrevista médico-pericial; Elicitação; Prova pericial; Viés cognitivo; Metodologia pericial.
Abstract
The medical-legal interview is a central stage of expert evidence, essential for factual reconstruction and causal analysis. METHODS: A narrative literature review on elicitation and forensic interviewing was conducted, with conceptual adaptation to medical expertise. RESULTS: Evidence shows that interview structure directly affects narrative reliability. DISCUSSION: A structured elicitation-based methodology is proposed to mitigate cognitive, linguistic, and motivational biases. CONCLUSION: Elicitation enhances the quality of medical-legal interviews and strengthens expert conclusions.
Keywords (MeSH): Medical-legal interview; Elicitation; Expert evidence; Cognitive bias; Forensic methodology.
References
1. Loftus EF, Palmer JC. Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 1974;13(5):585–589.
2. Hoffman RR, Shadbolt NR, Burton AM, Klein G. Eliciting knowledge from experts: a methodological analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1995;62(2):129–158.
3. Cooke NJ. Varieties of knowledge elicitation techniques. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 1994;41(6):801–849.
4. Nickerson RS. Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol. 1998;2(2):175–220.
5. Memon A, Meissner CA, Fraser J. The cognitive interview: a meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2010;16(4):340–372.
6. Cross TP. Research from January 2022 to February 2025 on child forensic interviewing questions and related methods. APSAC Advisor. 2025;38(2):1–22.
7. Farrugia L, Gabbert F, Hope L, Fraser J. Forensic interviewing of vulnerable interviewees in England and Wales: a study space analysis. J Police Crim Psychol. 2025;40:933–947.
