Authors:Maria Sparacino, B.S., Florida International University Victoria Carlson, B.S., Florida International University Jacqueline R Evans, Ph.D., Florida International University Melissa B Russano, Ph.D., Roger Williams University Kate A Houston, Ph.D., Texas A&M International University Research on interrogations has largely focused on whether an interpreter should be an active or passive member of the interrogation team. Little consideration has been given to the role the interpreter may play after questioning. Interpreters’ memories are an important source of information as they are the only one in the interrogation room who can understand both sides of the conversation, especially when there is no recording of the interrogation. Thus, we were interested in whether interpreters can accurately recall the interrogations that they interpret. Past research has not empirically examined interpreters’ ability to successfully recall the content that they interpret, and there is reason to suspect that their memories may be poor due to the high levels of cognitive resources required for interpretation. Conversely, interpreting may lead to deeper processing, therefore benefitting encoding and recall. The current study examined whether the act of interpreting leads to impaired or enhanced memory by comparing the memory of an interpreter and observer for the same interaction. Delay was also manipulated to determine whether performance varies as a function of the time elapsed between interpretation and recall. Furthermore, we tested the utility of a potential memory aid, the “structure briefing,” which provided the interpreter with the general sequence of topics that the interrogator discussed before the interrogation took place. The current study used a 2 (Recall Timing: Immediate (10 minutes) vs. Delayed (2 hours) x 2 (Pre-interrogation Structure Briefing: Absent vs. Present) x 2 (Role: Interpreter vs. Observer) x 2 (Stimulus: Script A vs. Script B) mixed desi...