Can Children Be Useful Witnesses? It Depends How They Are Questioned

Brown, Deirdre A.; Lamb, Michael E.

doi:10.1111/cdep.12142

Cited by 81 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Historically, child witnesses were thought to be inherently unreliable (Odegard & Toglia, 2013), but the consensus now is that even developmentally young children provide at least some accurate information if interviewed appropriately (Bull, 2010;. As children develop, the amount and accuracy of their recall increases (Brown & Lamb, 2015;Odegard & Toglia, 2013), and their suggestibility declines (London, Henry, Conradt, & Corser, 2013). The most reliable evidence from child witnesses is obtained using free recall and open questions (Brown & Lamb, 2015;Bull, 2010;), which appears to maximise their recall without compromising accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As children develop, the amount and accuracy of their recall increases (Brown & Lamb, 2015;Odegard & Toglia, 2013), and their suggestibility declines (London, Henry, Conradt, & Corser, 2013). The most reliable evidence from child witnesses is obtained using free recall and open questions (Brown & Lamb, 2015;Bull, 2010;), which appears to maximise their recall without compromising accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do measures of memory, language, and attention predict eyewitness memory in children with and without autism?

Henry

Messer

Wilcock

et al. 2017

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims: There are few investigations of the relationship between cognitive abilities (memory, language, and attention) and children's eyewitness performance in typically developing children, and even fewer in children on the autism spectrum. Such investigations are important to identify key cognitive processes underlying eyewitness recall, and assess how predictive such measures are compared to intelligence, diagnostic group status (autism or typically developing) and age. Methods: A total of 272 children (162 boys, 110 girls) of age 76 months to 142 months (M ¼ 105 months) took part in this investigation: 71 children with autism and 201 children with typical development. The children saw a staged event involving a minor mock crime and were asked about what they had witnessed in an immediate Brief Interview. This focused on free recall, included a small number of open-ended questions, and was designed to resemble an initial evidence gathering statement taken by police officers arriving at a crime scene. Children were also given standardised tests of intelligence, memory, language, and attention. Results & conclusions: Despite the autism group recalling significantly fewer items of correct information than the typically developing group at Brief Interview, both groups were equally accurate in their recall: 89% of details recalled by the typically developing group and 87% of the details recalled by the autism group were correct. To explore the relationship between Brief Interview performance and the cognitive variables, alongside age, diagnostic group status and non-verbal intelligence quotient, multiple hierarchical regression analyses were conducted, with Brief Interview performance as the dependant variable. Age and diagnostic group status were significant predictors of correct recall, whereas non-verbal intelligence was less important. After age, non-verbal intelligence, and diagnostic group status had been accounted for, the only cognitive variables that were significant predictors of Brief Interview performance were measures of memory (specifically, memory for faces and memory for stories). There was little evidence of there being differences between the autism and typically developing groups in the way the cognitive variables predicted the Brief Interview. Implications: The findings provide reassurance that age -the most straightforward information to which all relevant criminal justice professionals have access -provides a helpful indication of eyewitness performance. The accuracy of prediction can be improved by knowing the child's diagnostic status (i.e. whether the child is on the autism spectrum), and further still by using more specific assessments (namely memory for faces and memory for stories), possibly via the input of a trained professional. Importantly, the findings also confirm that whilst children with autism may recall less information than typically developing children, the information they do recall is just as accurate.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do measures of memory, language, and attention predict eyewitness memory in children with and without autism?

Henry

Messer

Wilcock

et al. 2017

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perhaps, the varying interview methods contributing to the data for the model of Reese et al () masked the competencies of younger children, revealed here when they were encouraged to provide a very detailed account of their experiences. Just as in other contexts where children learn from the adults around them (e.g., parent–child talk about the past, Nelson, ), we see in forensic interviews how children learn from unfamiliar adults even in the course of very brief interactions, with the style of interaction assuming great importance (Brown & Lamb, , ). Testing this hypothesis is a key avenue for future research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Narrative skill and testimonial accuracy in typically developing children and those with intellectual disabilities

Brown

Lewis

et al. 2018

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryChildren must describe maltreatment coherently for their testimony to be influential in court. We know little about how well children with intellectual disabilities (CWID) describe their experiences relative to typically developing (TD) children, despite CWID's vulnerability to maltreatment. We investigated children's reports of an experienced event and compared coherence in CWID (mild to moderate impairment: 7–11 years) with TD children matched for mental (4–10 years) or chronological age (7–11 years). All children included important markers of narrative coherence in their reports. Children with lower mental ages, particularly those with an intellectual disability, included fewer markers of narrative coherence in their reports than children with higher mental ages. Individual markers of narrative coherence, particularly recall of content, predicted accuracy of testimony and resistance to suggestion even when disability and mental age were taken into account. These findings highlight the importance of helping children to describe their experiences coherently.

show abstract

“…Over recent decades, an extensive body of scholarship has advanced our understanding of children's capabilities and performance in investigative interviews, clarifying how to maximize the amount and accuracy of the information provided while minimizing the risk of eliciting erroneous information. In particular, research has shown that the type of questioning affects both the quantity and quality of the elicited information (for reviews see Brown & Lamb, ; Lamb, Hershkowitz, Orbach, & Esplin, ; Lamb, La Rooy, Malloy, & Katz, ; Poole & Lamb, ; Saywitz, Lyon, & Goodman, ; Westcott, Davies, & Bull, ). Most of the relevant field research has involved close analysis of forensic interviews, with much less attention paid to in‐court testimony, which was the focus of the present research.…”

Section: Interviewing Children: Best‐practice Guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interviews of Children in a Portuguese Special Judicial Procedure

Peixoto

Fernandes²,

Almeida

et al. 2017

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2007, alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Portugal have provided evidence in a mandatory "Declarações para Memória Futura" (DMF; English transl. 'Statement for future use') proceeding. In order to protect children from having to testify in court, interviews conducted at the DMF can be used later as trial evidence because the hearings are conducted by judges. The present study examined 137 interviews with 3- to 17-year-olds conducted in several Portuguese criminal courts. Detailed examination of interview transcripts showed that 69% of all questions asked were option-posing questions, 16% were directive questions, 11% were suggestive questions, and only 3% were open-ended prompts. The vast majority of details provided by children were thus obtained using the risky recognition-based prompts (i.e., option posing and suggestive questions) associated with the risks of contaminating and limiting children's informativeness, both potential threats to the credibility of their testimony. There is an urgent need to address this issue and consider the implementation of a scientifically validated structured interview protocol in Portugal. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Can Children Be Useful Witnesses? It Depends How They Are Questioned

Cited by 81 publications

References 58 publications

Do measures of memory, language, and attention predict eyewitness memory in children with and without autism?

Do measures of memory, language, and attention predict eyewitness memory in children with and without autism?

Narrative skill and testimonial accuracy in typically developing children and those with intellectual disabilities

Interviews of Children in a Portuguese Special Judicial Procedure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About