Drawing conclusions: Instructing witnesses to draw what happened to them

We reviewed the child and the adult literature on the impact of witnesses drawing what happened on the number of details recalled and the accuracy of the reported details. Most experiments reported a beneficial effect of drawing what happened (or drawing the scene) on the number of details reported primarily in free recall and sometimes also in cued recall. The consensus across studies was that drawing protocols did not negatively impact the accuracy of reported details (when accuracy was attainable) unless suggestive details were drawn. These results were largely consistent regardless of interviewer expertise or protocol used. Draw‐and‐tell instructions should be considered by forensic investigators for the following reasons: (1) the beneficial effect on number of details recalled with no detriment to accuracy, (2) the added benefit for children who need additional interviewer support, and (3) the ease at which the instruction can be implemented with minimal expertise or training. However, more ecologically valid research is needed to establish the efficacy of drawing (1) in forensic interviews, (2) in the presence of misinformation, (3) across instances of repeated event memory, and (4) across sequential interviews.