Detecting children's false allegations and recantations of a crime

Wyman, Joshua; Foster, Ida; Lavoie, Jennifer; Tong, Donia; Talwar, Victoria

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2017.1402018

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to prior research on lie-telling in children, which has focused on falsification rather than concealment, deceptive children uttered fewer words than nontransgression truth-tellers (e.g., Wyman et al, 2018). This finding highlights the need to understand concealment as a qualitatively different form of deception than falsification.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 87%

“…For example, a metaanalysis on cues to deception in adults that combined 49 effect sizes from studies examining response length (word count) of truthful and deceptive responses revealed no significant differences (DePaulo et al, 2003). Similarly, studies on children's truthful and deceptive reports during free and cued recall have also found that the average length of their responses do not differ (e.g., Block et al, 2012;Landström et al, 2007;Saykaly et al, 2013;Vrij et al, 2006;Warren et al, 2015;Warren et al, 2012;Wyman et al, 2018).…”

Section: Concealment Styles When Asked Recall Questions: Word Count Generic Under-informative Responses and Specific Under-informative Rementioning

confidence: 99%

“…When examining children's response style, it is also important to consider the effects of age. Regardless of veracity, younger children's responses tend to be shorter compared to older children and adults (e.g., Connolly et al, 2008; Warren et al, 2018; Williams et al, 2014; Wyman et al, 2018). Hence, it will be important to consider age in assessing the relation between children's under‐informativeness and honesty.…”

Section: Concealment Styles When Asked Recall Questions: Word Count Generic Under‐informative Responses and Specific Under‐informative Rementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Children's under‐informative responding is associated with concealment of a transgression

Gongola

Williams

Lyon

2021

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concealment (i.e., omitting information without saying anything untrue) has received little empirical attention relative to falsification (i.e., false statements). This study examined free recall reports among a sample of 349 maltreated and nonmaltreated children ages four to nine, and found that concealment of a minor transgression was significantly associated with two types of responding: generic under-informative responding, wherein responses are relevant but imprecise, general, or vague; and specific under-informative responding, wherein responses selectively omit incriminating details. Under-informative responding failed to distinguish between children who would ultimately reveal the transgression when asked recognition questions and children who would answer falsely. The results suggest that children's initial recall reports may provide some insight into the likelihood that they are concealing information.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 87%

Section: Concealment Styles When Asked Recall Questions: Word Count Generic Under-informative Responses and Specific Under-informative Rementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concealment Styles When Asked Recall Questions: Word Count Generic Under‐informative Responses and Specific Under‐informative Rementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Children's under‐informative responding is associated with concealment of a transgression

Gongola

Williams

Lyon

2021

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…yes or no responses). Emerging research has begun to examine the detection of children's higher-stake lies (Nysse-Carris, Bottoms, & Salerno, 2011;Wyman, Foster, Lavoie, Tong, & Talwar, 2018) and lies told in a free-recall narrative (e.g. Saykaly et al, 2017;Talwar et al, 2006;Wyman et al, 2018).…”

Section: Lie-detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emerging research has begun to examine the detection of children's higher-stake lies (Nysse-Carris, Bottoms, & Salerno, 2011;Wyman, Foster, Lavoie, Tong, & Talwar, 2018) and lies told in a free-recall narrative (e.g. Saykaly et al, 2017;Talwar et al, 2006;Wyman et al, 2018). This has been an important development in the field as requesting adults to evaluate children when they are interviewed utilizing a freerecall narrative after they have engaged in a more serious transgression with an adult may be more akin to scenarios in which children are interviewed in a forensic context.…”

Section: Lie-detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Younger and older adults’ lie-detection and credibility judgments of children's coached reports

O’Connor

Lyon

Evans

2019

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has examined young and middle-aged adults' perceptions of child witnesses; however, no research to date has examined how potential older adult jurors may perceive a child witness. The present investigation examined younger (18-30 years, N = 100) and older adults' (66-89 years, N = 100) liedetection and credibility judgments when viewing children's truthful and dishonest reports. Participants viewed eight child interview videos where children (9-11 years of age) either provided a truthful report or a coached fabricated report to conceal a transgression. Participants provided lie-detection judgments following all eight videos and credibility assessments following the first two videos. Participants completed a General Lifespan Credibility questionnaire to assess credibility evaluations across various witness ages. Lie-detection results indicated that older adults had significantly lower discrimination scores, a stronger truth bias, and greater confidence compared to younger adults. Older adults also rated children as more competent to testify in court, credible, honest, believable, and likeable than younger adults. Participants with greater differences in their credibility evaluations for truth and lie-tellers were significantly more accurate at detecting lies. Responses to the Lifespan Credibility questionnaire revealed significant differences in younger and older adults' credibility evaluations across the lifespan.

show abstract

Using cognitive instructions to elicit narrative differences between children's true and false testimonies

Tong¹,

Wyman

Talwar³

2021

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a need to tell if children are providing truthful testimonies in legal cases. This study examined differences between children's true and false statements obtained using either an interview that included cognitive instructions or one that did not. Children witnessed a theft that they were asked to deny and were interviewed with or without cognitive instructions. Truth‐tellers were more forthcoming when they were interviewed using cognitive instructions. Honest statements contained more information about the theft than dishonest statements, but only amongst children interviewed using cognitive instructions. All cognitive instructions were effective at eliciting more details from truth‐tellers than liars. Overall, cognitive instructions encourage children to be forthcoming and provide informative testimonies, as well as facilitate lie detection. Findings can inform interviewing practices that incorporate cognitive instructions for forensic and legal professionals to use with child witnesses.

show abstract

Detecting children's false allegations and recantations of a crime

Cited by 12 publications

References 50 publications

Children's under‐informative responding is associated with concealment of a transgression

Children's under‐informative responding is associated with concealment of a transgression

Younger and older adults’ lie-detection and credibility judgments of children's coached reports

Using cognitive instructions to elicit narrative differences between children's true and false testimonies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About