More than suggestion: The effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin Preschool case.

Garven, Sena; Wood, James M.; Malpass, Roy S.; Shaw, John

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.347

Cited by 262 publications

(245 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

231

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with a large body of research (e.g., BakerWard et al, 1993;Leichtman & Ceci, 1995;Peterson, 1999;Quas & Schaaf, 2002), memory was expected to improve, and false reports were expected to decrease with age. Also, children questioned by the biased interviewer were expected to be more likely to claim that they played with the man than were children questioned by the control interviewer (e.g., Garven et al, 1998;Thompson et al, 1997). These main effects were expected to be subsumed by several interactions.…”

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, as mentioned, several false event studies began with the interviewer explicitly telling children that the events occurred, for instance, by saying that their parents indicated the events took place, by telling children to imagine the events occurring, and/or by telling children that their friends already confirmed the events' occurrence (Bruck et al, 2002;Ceci, Huffman, et al, 1994). Such highly biased statements and interviewer pressure can lead to false reports even in a single interview (e.g., Garven, Wood, Malpass, & Shaw, 1998;Quas et al, 1999;Thompson, Clarke-Stewart, & Lepore, 1997). It is thus critical to determine whether simply repeatedly interviewing children about a false event is sufficient to produce considerable errors or whether a biased interviewer, alone or in conjunction with repeated interviews, underlies children's inaccuracies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Quas

Malloy

Melinder

et al. 2007

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on children's memory and suggestibility. Three-and 5-year-olds were singly or repeatedly interviewed about a play event by a highly biased or control interviewer. Children interviewed once by the biased interviewer after a long delay made the most errors. Children interviewed repeatedly, regardless of interviewer bias, were more accurate and less likely to falsely claim that they played with a man. In free recall, among children questioned once after a long delay by the biased interviewer, 5-year-olds were more likely than were 3-year-olds to claim falsely that they played with a man. However, in response to direct questions, 3-year-olds were more easily manipulated into implying that they played with him. Findings suggest that interviewer bias is particularly problematic when children's memory has weakened. In contrast, repeated interviews that occur a short time after a to-be-remembered event do not necessarily increase children's errors, even when interviews include misleading questions and interviewer bias. Implications for developmental differences in memory and suggestibility are discussed. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptAlthough it is well accepted that memories are not exact replicas of prior experiences but instead are reconstructions (Loftus, 1979), the nature of these reconstructions and the effects of developmental and contextual influences on them remain debated. One noteworthy debate has focused on the effects of repeated interviews on children's memory and suggestibility. In particular, concerns have been raised that the more often a child is interviewed, the more often misinformation might be presented-intentionally or inadvertently-leading to increased inaccuracy over time. Moreover, repeated demands for a child to retrieve information from memory may increase confabulations due to social pressure. Despite these concerns, studies of children's memory for experienced events generally suggest that repeated interviews can improve performance by facilitating recall and reducing forgetting (e.g., Howe, Courage, & Bryant-Brown, 1993;Peterson, 1999). Yet, in a second line of research, specifically when children are suggestively questioned about false events, adverse effects of repeated interviews appear to emerge (e.g., Bruck, Ceci, & Hembrooke, 2002;Leichtman & Ceci, 1995).A simple explanation for the different patterns of results is that repeated interviews benefit memory when the to-be-remembered event is true and distort memory when the to-beremembered event is false. However, a number of other factors likely contribute to the evident reduction in accuracy when children are repeatedly interviewed about fictitious events, making the simple explanation premature. For instance, studies concerning children's false event reports following repeated interviews often began with an interviewer explicitly stating that the false events occurred...

show abstract

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Quas

Malloy

Melinder

et al. 2007

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After the case was closed with no convictions, the interviewing techniques used on the children were found to generate false memories in children with no relation to the McMartin case [10].…”

Section: False Memoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brian Williams and the Perils of the Use of Autobiographical Me mory in Research

2015

J Mass Communicat Journalism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Despite a focus on children as vulnerable witnesses and children's rights since the early 1900s, the high-profile child abuse cases of the 1980s and 1990s [such as the McMartin preschool and Kelly Michaels case in the USA (State v. Buckey 1990;Garven et al 1998;Myers 2009), and the Orkney inquiries in the United Kingdom (Clyde 1992)] did not gain the attention of psychological and legal professionals in the Nordic countries. They did pay attention, however, when the media and public were introduced to two well-documented Nordic cases where defendants were found not guilty due to inappropriate investigative interviewing protocols (see, e.g.…”

Section: The Development Of the Nordic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Nordic Model of Handling Children’s Testimonies

Myklebust

2017

Collaborating Against Child Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

More than suggestion: The effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin Preschool case.

Cited by 262 publications

References 50 publications

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Brian Williams and the Perils of the Use of Autobiographical Me mory in Research

The Nordic Model of Handling Children’s Testimonies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About