"Because she's one who listens": children discuss disclosure recipients in forensic interviews

The current study examined investigative interviews using the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol with 204, five- to thirteen-year-old suspected victims of child sexual abuse. The analyses focused on who children told, who they wanted (or did not want) to tell and why, their expectations about being believed, and other general motivations for disclosure. Children's spontaneous reports as well as their responses to interviewer questions about disclosure were explored. Results demonstrated that the majority of children discussed disclosure recipients in their interviews, with 78 children (38%) explaining their disclosures. Only 15 children (7%) mentioned expectations about whether recipients would believe their disclosures. There were no differences between the types of information elicited by interviewers and those provided spontaneously, suggesting that, when interviewed in an open-ended, facilitative manner, children themselves produce informative details about their disclosure histories. Results have practical implications for professionals who interview children about sexual abuse.

Individual differences in children's suggestibility : a comparison between intellectually disabled and mainstream samples

This study examined whether age, gender, intelligence, communication ability and shyness predict intellectually disabled children’s susceptibility to an interviewer’s misleading suggestions. Further, the study examined whether the relative influence of these factors differs between intellectually disabled and mainstream samples. Participants included 75 children with mild and borderline intellectual disabilities (aged 77–158 months) and 83 mainstream children (aged 68–152 months). All children were individually administered the Yield and Shift subscales of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (Form 2) as well as standardised measures of IQ, shyness and communication ability. For the intellectually disabled children, multiple regression analyses revealed that age, IQ and communication inversely predicted Yield suggestibility, however, none of the factors predicted Shift suggestibility. For the mainstream children, age made a significant independent contribution to both Yield and Shift suggestibility, while IQ was a significant predictor of Shift suggestibility. When comparing the relative impact of these factors across the samples, age had a significantly greater impact on mainstream (compared with intellectually disabled) children’s Shift suggestibility, while IQ had a significantly greater influence on intellectually disabled (compared with mainstream) children’s Yield scores. These findings highlight the limited generalisability of previous findings involving mainstream children’s suggestibility to intellectually disabled samples.

The effect of intellectual disability on children's recall of an event across different question types

This research examined the performance of 80 children aged 9–12 years with either a mild and moderate intellectual disability when recalling an innocuous event that was staged in their school. The children actively participated in a 30-min magic show, which included 21 specific target items. The first interview (held 3 days after the magic show) provided false and true biasing information about these 21 items. The second interview (held the following day) was designed to elicit the children's recall of the target details using the least number of specific prompts possible. The children's performance was compared with that of 2 control groups; a group of mainstream children matched for mental age and a group of mainstream children matched for chronological age. Overall, this study showed that children with either a mild or moderate intellectual disability can provide accurate and highly specific event-related information. However, their recall is less complete and less clear in response to free-narrative prompts and less accurate in response to specific questions when compared to both the mainstream age-matched groups. The implications of the findings for legal professionals and researchers are discussed.

A review of the impact of different types of leading interview questions on child and adult witnesses with intellectual disabilities

Children and adults with intellectual disabilities have traditionally been considered poor witnesses because they are easily misled and produce less accurate information in interviews when compared with individuals without intellectual disabilities. However, witnesses’ levels of accuracy depend on the types of questions that they are asked, such as whether they are open or closed and whether they contain misleading information. In the current systematic review, we examined the literature investigating the different types of misleading questions commonly used in interviews, and their influence on the memories of adults and children with and without an intellectual disability. Thirteen articles that met inclusion criteria were reviewed. It was found that, compared with other question types, open and closed questions that presumed certain information to be true elicited the greatest number of errors in children and adults with intellectual disabilities compared with other question types. These findings reinforce the notion that the onus is on interviewers – particularly when interviewing vulnerable witnesses – to avoid leading questions that presume information that may not be true.

Deficient cognitive control fuels children's exuberant false allegations.

In eyewitness studies as in actual investigations, a minority of children generate numerous false (and sometimes incredulous) allegations. To explore the characteristics of these children, we reinterviewed and administered a battery of tasks to 61 children (ages 4-9 years) who had previously participated in an eyewitness study where a man broke a "germ rule" twice when he tried to touch them. Performance on utilization, response conflict (Luria tapping), and theory of mind tasks predicted the number of false reports of touching (with age and time since the event controlled) and correctly classified 90.16% of the children as typical witnesses or exuberant (more than 3) false reporters. Results of a factor analysis pointed to a common process underlying performance on these tasks that accounted for 49% of the variability in false reports. Relations between task performance and testimony confirmed that the mechanisms underlying occasional intrusions are different from those that drive persistent confabulation and that deficient cognitive control fuels young children's exuberant false reports.

Identity crisis in identification evidence: Similarity judgments as an alternative to identification decisions.

This research explored similarity ratings as an alternative to identifications with regards to eyewitness evidence. This involved replacing the concept of binary identity decisions with continuum-based similarity judgments. Preliminary evidence suggested that a relationship exists between similarity and identity, and that ratings offer a number of advantages over identifications.

Sources of unreliable testimony from children

We distilled research findings on sources of unreliable testimony from children into four principles that capture how the field of forensic developmental psychology conceptualizes this topic. The studies selected to illustrate these principles address three major questions: (a) how do young children perform in eyewitness studies, (b) why are some children less accurate than others, and (c) what phenomena generate unreliable testimony? Throughout our research, our focus is on factors other than lying that produce inaccurate or seemingly inconsistent autobiographical reports.Collectively, this research has shown that (a) children’s eyewitness accuracy is highly dependent on context, (b) neurological immaturity makes children vulnerable to errors under some circumstances, and (c) some children are more swayed by external influences than others. Finally, the diversity of factors that can influence the reliability of children’s testimony dictates that (d) analyzing children’s testimony as if they were adults (i.e., with adult abilities, sensibilities, and motivations) will lead to frequent misunderstandings. It takes considerable knowledge of development—including information about developmental psycholinguistics, memory development, and the gradual emergence of cognitive control—to work with child witnesses and to analyze cases as there are many sources of unreliable testimony.

Improving the reliability of child witness testimony in court : the importance of focusing on questioning techniques

Considerable discussion during recent years has focused on ways to increase the reliability of child witness evidence, and reduce the negative impact of the courtroom environment on children's credibility and their psychological well-being. A large proportion of this discussion has focused on removing child witnesses from the courtroom and developing alternative arrangements by which children can give evidence (e.g., videotaped statements used as evidence-in-chief, closed-circuit television). There is no doubt that these arrangements have played a major role in reducing children's feelings of uncertainty and intimidation, and they have increased the ability of children 10 tell their stories and answer questions reliably (Cashmore 2002; Eastwood & Patton 2002). However, there are many
other factors. apart from the physical environment in which a child's evidence is elicited, that impact on the quality and accuracy of a child witness's evidence.

This contemporary comment focuses on one of the most important factors that impacts on the quality and accuracy of a child's evidence; the questioning techniques. It offers four recommendations for improving the reliability of child witness evidence in court. along with justifications for these recommendations and suggestions for bow these recommendations might be implemented. Each suggestion focuses on the impact of questioning techniques, from pre-trial questioning to questioning during the trial. It does not focus on the rules of evidence regarding child statements or the physical environment in which children's evidence is elicited.

The social validity of interventions for promoting preschool childrens peer interactions

This analogue study investigated the social validity of classroom interventions designed to promote peer interactions in young children. The influences of child characteristics and diagnostic labels on social validity ratings were examined, as were the relationships among three components of social validity. Forty-two preschool teachers completed a 15-item social validity scale that yielded scores pertaining to intervention goals, procedures and effects. Participants rated three types of intervention, which varied according to individuals targeted and intensity of programming procedures, with reference to one of three case descriptions of children with social interaction problems. Half the participants were provided with the child’s diagnostic label. Results indicated that social validity is affected by interactions between intervention methods and child characteristics. The inclusion of diagnostic labels in the case descriptions had no effect on social validity ratings. Strong positive relationships were found among the components of social validity. Implications for the use of empirically validated interventions in inclusive preschools are discussed.

Child testimony in custody cases: a review

The authors provide a brief historical review of judicial trends in child custody placement. In contrast to the start of the 19th century, by its end, courts took into consideration children's best interests, maternal rights, and prevailing sex role ideologies. Statutory changes began to reflect similar concerns by the end of that century. Modern practices, relying on the best interests of the child standard, also include consistent consideration of children's preferences in making custody determinations. An important factor in this context is the accuracy with which a child describes domestic relations, especially in contested cases with contradictory allegations by parents. Research dealing with children's report accuracy and techniques to enhance it are reviewed, and a description of various practical considerations when questioning children is provided.