Information gathering in school contexts: A national survey of school resource officers.

Abstract

Objective: Despite the presence of law enforcement personnel in schools (i.e., school resource officers or SROs) and the increased recognition of the importance of developmentally appropriate questioning practices, the school context remains underexamined within the juvenile interrogation literature. In the present study, we sought to take an initial step in addressing this gap by conducting a national survey of SROs in the U.S. regarding their questioning practices with children and youth in schools and SROs’ associated developmental knowledge and training. Hypotheses: We made several predictions including that SROs would (1) report regular involvement in questioning students, particularly adolescents; (2) demonstrate accurate developmental knowledge in some respects, generally viewing children as more developmentally limited than adolescents; and (3a) consider age and the nature of the offense in their questioning of students while (3b) demonstrating some gaps in applying their developmental knowledge to interrogative contexts (e.g., endorsing some developmentally inappropriate questioning practices). Method: SROs across the United States (N = 287, 81% male, Mage = 42 years, 93% White) completed a survey examining their perceptions of child/youth development and interrogation practices and training as well as their responses to hypothetical scenarios. Results: SROs reported regular involvement in questioning students about criminal behavior. SROs demonstrated awareness of some important developmental limitations of children/youth but, at times, did not appear to apply this knowledge when questioning juveniles themselves. Approximately half of the sampled SROs had not received training regarding juvenile interrogation, and most indicated a need for more structured training on the topic. Conclusion: SROs serve as information gatherers within the school setting who may benefit from additional juvenile interviewing/interrogation training.

Recommending Reform: A Critical Race and Critical Policy Analysis of Research Recommendations About School Resource Officers

“…and youth ‘acting out’” (Ghavami et al, 2021, p. 13). Finally, others recommended training specific to the roles and responsibilities of different actors within the school (Lopez, 2019), addressing bullying (Paez & Colvin, 2021), and training on youth development more generally (Fisher & Devlin, 2020; May & Higgins, 2011; Snow et al, 2021; Stinson & Watkins, 2014; Theriot, 2016). Importantly, there was not a consensus on the recommendations regarding the focus, amount, or who should monitor this training.…”

Juveniles and adults differ in their beliefs about cues to deception and strategies during a hypothetical police interview

“…This training includes use of the BAI, with a particular focus on how students' nonverbal and verbal behaviors can indicate truth or deception. In a survey of School Resource Officers (SROs), 41.5% reported attending a Reid training and 84% reported using behavioral cues to judge the legitimacy of juvenile students' statements (Snow et al, 2021). Moreover, SROs estimated they could reliability detect deception 66% of the time by “analyzing children's and youth's eye movements, speech patterns, and body language” (pg.…”

Current investigator practices and beliefs on interviewing trafficked minors.

“…Instead, they increasingly recognize more realistic depictions as being the most prevalent types of cases (e.g., domestically-based, at-risk minors being involved in controlling relationships; victims being isolated from friends, family, and community; Gerassi et al, 2021). Likewise, with regard to questioning of minors, although law enforcement still at times use similar interrogation tactics when questioning adolescent versus adult suspects of crime (which could include some minor victims who present as delinquents), law enforcement do recognize developmental differences in suggestibility, including that adolescents are more prone to error than adults (Meyer & Reppucci, 2007; Reppucci et al, 2010), and report a need to vary questioning practices based on youth age (Snow et al, 2021). Finally, law enforcement also appear cognizant that more than one interview might be needed with victims (Duron & Remko, 2020; Malloy et al, 2007) and suspects (Kassin et al, 2007) to elicit full disclosures.…”

“…Given that a majority of minor victims of trafficking begin being trafficked and are questioned by law enforcement about trafficking during the adolescent years (Smith et al, 2009), it is of considerable interest to ascertain how much law enforcement know about adolescent development generally, particularly developmental characteristics that can both place minors at risk for victimization and increase their reluctance to tell adults about that victimization. One such characteristic is that of impulsiveness.…”

“…Finally, prosecutors cite victim cooperativeness, interview disclosures, and testimony as highly influential to their case (Farrell et al, 2014;Smith et al, 2009). With trafficking victims specifically, prosecutors express concerns that victims' relationship to the perpetrator will undermine their cooperation (Nichols & Heil, 2015;Reid & Jones, 2011) and victim uncooperativeness is associated with reduced likelihood of prosecutors accepting a case (Farrell et al, 2016;Farrell & Kane, 2020;Nichols & Heil, 2015;O'Neal et al, 2015).…”