When Juries “Hear” Children Testify: The Effects of Eyewitness Age and Speech Style on Jurors’ Perceptions of Testimony

The Impact of Age, Speech Style, and Question Form on Perceptions of Witness Credibility and Trial Outcome1

“…As predicted, when the witnesses spoke in a powerful manner, there were no reliable differences in credibility ratings among the three age groups. In contrast to findings in the present experiment, Nigro et al (1989) found that mock jurors were most likely to find the defendant guilty when the child witness spoke in a powerfd manner. Schmidt and Brigham (1 996) found that the 5-year-old witness who spoke in a powerful manner was judged to be the most intelligent/selfassured and the most truthfWaccurate witness.…”

“…The inconsistencies in the research may be a result of the fact that most of the experiments have manipulated more than age and, in a good number of studies, age has been found to interact with other manipulated variables (Duggan et al, 1989;Leippe et al, 1992;Leippe & Romanczyk, 1987;Nigro et al, 1989;Schmidt & Brigham, 1996). Clearly, age alone is not the criterion on which judgments of credibility are made.…”

Children's credibility on camera: the influence of age and production factors

“…Researchers must be cautious when generalising from studies focusing on the credibility of child witnesses per se to the credibility of a particular child who is testifying (Leippe and Romanczyk, 1989;Nigro et al, 1989;Wells et al, 1989). Researchers must be cautious when generalising from studies focusing on the credibility of child witnesses per se to the credibility of a particular child who is testifying (Leippe and Romanczyk, 1989;Nigro et al, 1989;Wells et al, 1989).…”

“…Additionally, adults seem to differentiate between the credibility of older versus younger children. Nigro et al (1989), for example, found that the child's presentational style ('powerful' or 'weak') had a mediating influence on perceived credibility, so that a powerful child witness was judged more credible than even an adult witness on occasions (see also Goodman et al, 1989). However, more recent studies have employed increasingly sophisticated analyses and found that the situation is not so clear cut.…”

Cross-Examination of Sexual Assault Complainants: A Developmental Comparison

“…Sexual assault has been associated with low self-esteem and low self-confidence, attributes that have been shown to increase vulnerability to suggestion Singh & Gudjonnsson, 1984;Zajac, Jury, & O'Neill, in press). The characteristics most favourable to adult witnesses, such as confidence, powerful speech, perseverance in maintaining control of the verbal exchange, and eye contact, are those that are least likely in this population (Brewer & Burke, 2002;Bruck, Ceci, & Melnyk, 1997;Nigro, Buckley, Hill, & Nelson, 1989;Peiffer & Trull, 2000;Poole & White, 1991;Porter, Campbell, Birt, & Woodworth, 2003). Consequently, it is important to examine how adult complainants of sexual abuse are cross-examined in the courtroom, and how they respond to these types of questions.…”