Changed Responses Under Cross‐examination: The Role of Anxiety and Individual Differences in Child Witnesses

Abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link CROSS-EXAMINATION CHILDREN, ANXIETY, INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND CROSS-EXAMINATION 2 AbstractThe present study explored whether levels of anxiety, and a range of individual differences measures (age, IQ, and suggestibility), could predict performance during crossexamination questioning. Eighty-three children (aged 4-11 years) witnessed a staged event before being interviewed (3-6 days later) and cross-examined (ten months later). Results demonstrated that cross-examination induced a significant rise in anxiety levels. Further, recall of unchallenged details (based on children's initial testimony, which they reviewed prior to cross-examination) and anxiety levels were the only significant predictors of crossexamination performance. Further research is needed to explore the inter-relationship between anxiety and other individual difference measures on cross-examination performance, and to determine how to alleviate the anxiety of child witnesses (to enable them to achieve their best evidence in court). Preparation to ensure children understand the importance of attending to the recording of their original evidence may improve children's resilience under cross-examination and reduce anxiety levels.

Individual Differences in Children’s Suggestibility: An Updated Review

“…Bruck and Melnyk (2004) proposed that perhaps the relation between intelligence and suggestibility is most pronounced for children under the age of eight years. This pattern was not apparent, however, in the present sample (Bettenay, Ridley, Henry, & Crane, 2015;Caprin et al, 2016;Gignac & Powell, 2006;Gilstrap & Papierno, 2004;Gudjonsson et al, 2016;Melinder et al, 2010;Roma, Sabatello, Verrastro, & Ferracuti, 2011). Although there was some evidence of an association between intelligence and suggestibility in two studies with children under the age of 8 years (Bettenay et al, 2015;Gignac & Powell, 2006), another found links in a sample of 8-10-year olds (Roma et al, 2011), and there was no association in the remaining four studies that included children under the age of 8 (6-11-year olds: Caprin et al, 2016; 3-7-year olds: Gilstrap & Papierno, 2004;7-16-year olds: Gudjonsson et al, 2016;4-year olds: Melinder et al, 2010).…”

“…Caprin et al (2016) did not expect to find intelligence differences given that they included only a nonverbal measure of intelligence and expected language to play an important role. In line with this hypothesis, both Bettenay et al (2015) and Gignac and Powell (2006) included combined verbal and nonverbal intelligence measures and found some associations with suggestibility. However, Melinder et al (2010) did not find an association between verbal IQ and suggestibility, and Roma et al (2011) did find links between nonverbal intelligence and suggestibility.…”

“…Thus, although trait anxiety was a relatively pure measurement of an individual difference between children, the interviewing condition affected the measurement of state anxiety. Bettenay et al (2015), on the other hand, assessed 4-6-year-old children's state anxiety after experiencing a standardized cross-examination-style interview. Researchers found that children's reported state anxiety after the interview predicted more, and earlier, cedes to interviewer challenges.…”

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

“…Further research could explore other potential domains to identify variables which could increase the prediction of eyewitness performance, such as anxiety or suggestibility (e.g. Bettenay, Ridley, Henry, & Crane, 2015). (Note that measures of suggestibility were not relevant for the current study as we did not include leading or misleading questions, nor did we use a misinformation paradigm.…”

Reported communication challenges for adult witnesses with intellectual disabilities giving evidence in court

“…This is perhaps because of an historical attitude that those with ID give inaccurate testimonies and are therefore not viable witnesses (Bowden et al, 2014;Harris and Grace, 1999). Research, however, has demonstrated that this is not true, rather people with ID are able to give accurate evidence under certain conditions (Bettenay et al, 2015;Ericson et al, 1994;Gudjonsson et al, 2000;Henry and Gudjonsson, 1999;Michel et al, 2000). However, the presence of an ID can result in significant communication challenges for a witness when giving evidence in court that can impact on their testimony (Bowles and Sharman, 2014;Gudjonsson and Joyce, 2011).…”