Tall Tales Across Time: Narrative Analysis of True and False Allegations

Abstract

Little consensus exists regarding how the details of truthful and false allegations of traumatic victimisation may change over short and long time intervals, yet this cue is utilised in the assessment of witness, victim and suspect credibility. The present study involved a narrative analysis of the details written within 147 sets of allegation statements across both short-term (~3 months) and long-term (~6 months) intervals. Overall results indicated that true allegations contained more consistent details, omissions and commissions, although the rates of change over time were variable. These changes appear to result from natural variations in memory and recall over time. However, direct contradictions (inconsistent details) were more prevalent in false allegations, and these claims were more stable over time, suggesting 'script-like' processing. These results have implications for our understanding of testimonial alterations and how determinations of veracity are influenced by statement details.

What is told when the story is retold? Consistency of victimization reports in psychiatric patients

“…This is especially salient in individuals that suffered from repeated victimization. Thus, the memory concerning the occurrence of the victimization tends to be more precise than the memory for its specific course: participants remember the victimization, but may not be able to correctly recall if it happened during childhood, adolescence or adulthood (Hardt & Rutter, ; Peace et al ., ; Quas, Alexander, Goodman, Ghetti, Edelstein & Redlich, ; van Giezen et al ., ).…”

“…It has been suggested that there may be a trend to increase the number of victimization reported over assessments. This may be due to underreport in initial assessments, and the effect of rehearsal (Epstein & Bottoms, ; Ghetti, Goodman, Eisen, Qin & Davis, ; Kremers et al ., ; Kringsley, Gallagher, Weathers, Kulter & Kaloupek, ; Odinot, Wolters & van Giezen, ; Peace, Shudra, Forrester, Kasper, Harder & Porter, ).…”

The construction of allegedly abused children’s narratives in Scottish criminal courts

“…For example, as many potential jurors believe that false accusations of abuse by children are common (McGee et al, 2011), lawyers can use this belief to structure their argument and questioning. In addition, deviations from the 'ideal victim' of abuse can be used to assert that such abuse did not happen, or was consensual (Peace et al, 2015), as lawyers may be aware that jurors will have trouble 'anchoring' the events being described in court to socially constructed ideas of how child abuse occurs. Indeed, as the presence of such stereotypes have been found to influence mock-juror verdicts more than case facts (Goodman & Melinder, 2007) it seems logical that lawyers will exploit victim and perpetrator stereotypes for juror to anchor and understand the events in court in relation to a socially shared and accepted script (O'Connor, 2008).…”

“…Social representations may further create stereotypes of 'ideal' victims and 'ideal' defendants (Lindholm & Cederborg, 2016). Any deviations from these ideals may be highlighted by lawyers seeking to suggest that the abuse may not have occurred (Peace, Shudra, Forrester, Kasper, Harder, & Porter, 2015).…”

“…In addition, according to Scottish law, lawyers can use consent as a line of enquiry with children over the age of 13 years, thus offering more victim-blaming narratives (Cossins, 2008) and 'character assassination' techniques (Davies, Henderson, & Seymour, 1997) These questions suggest that defense lawyers used narratives of 'Implicit Sexual Behavior', and 'Adult Behaviors' to suggest a gradual progression into a consensual sexual relationship. The example implies that the child was an immature, troublesome, vixen who was responsible for the alleged sexual encounter (Peace et al, 2015;Rogers et al, 2016). The 'Lolita' portrayal of the victim was subsequently emphasized by the child's secrecy.…”