Lindsay C. Malloy

Developmental Differences in the Effects of Repeated Interviews and Interviewer Bias on Young Children's Event Memory and False Reports

The present study investigated developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on childrens 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 childrens memory has weakened. In contrast, repeated interviews that occur a short time after a to-be-remembered event do not necessarily increase childrens errors, even when interviews include misleading questions and interviewer bias. Implications for developmental differences in memory and suggestibility are discussed.

Expected Consequences of Disclosure Revealed in Investigative Interviews with Suspected Victims of Child Sexual Abuse

The current study explored the expected consequences of disclosure discussed by 204 5- to 13-year-old suspected victims of child sexual abuse during the course of investigative interviews conducted using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol. Expected consequences were mentioned in nearly half of all interviews, with older children and those alleging multiple incidents more likely to do so. Most consequences were mentioned spontaneously by children and most consequences were expected to befall the children themselves. The most common consequences were physical harm and feeling negative emotions for the child and jail/legal consequences for the suspect. Expecting consequences for the child or another family member were associated with delaying disclosure, but expecting consequences for the suspect was not related to delay. Results provide insight into developmental and socio-motivational influences on childrens disclosure of negative events and are of considerable practical interest to legal and clinical professionals who must interview, treat, and evaluate children alleging sexual abuse.

Because she's one who listens: Children discuss disclosure recipients in forensic interviews

The current study examined investigative interviews using the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol with 204, five- to thirteen-year-old suspected victims of child sexual abuse. The analyses focused on who children told, who they wanted (or did not want) to tell and why, their expectations about being believed, and other general motivations for disclosure. Children’s spontaneous reports as well as their responses to interviewer questions about disclosure were explored. Results demonstrated that the majority of children discussed disclosure recipients in their interviews, with 78 children (38%) explaining their disclosures. Only 15 children (7%) mentioned expectations about whether recipients would believe their disclosures. There were no differences between the types of information elicited by interviewers and those provided spontaneously, suggesting that, when interviewed in an open-ended, facilitative manner, children themselves produce informative details about their disclosure histories. Results have practical implications for professionals who interview children about sexual abuse.

Non-verbal behavior of children who disclose or do not disclose child abuse in investigative interviews

OBJECTIVE The study focused on childrens nonverbal behavior in investigative interviews exploring suspicions of child abuse. The key aims were to determine whether non-verbal behavior in the pre-substantive phases of the interview predicted whether or not children would disclose the alleged abuse later in the interview and to identify differences in the nonverbal behaviors of disclosing and non-disclosing children. METHOD We studied DVD-recorded interviews of 40 alleged victims of child abuse. In all cases, there was external evidence strongly suggesting that abuse had occurred. However, half of the children disclosed abuse when interviewed using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol, whereas the other half did not. Two raters, unaware whether or not the children disclosed, independently coded the videotapes for nonverbal indices of positive and negative emotions, stress, and physical disengagement in each 15-second unit of the introductory, rapport building, and substantive interview phases. RESULTS Indicators of stress and physical disengagement increased as the interviews progressed while indices of positive emotions decreased. Non-disclosers showed proportionately more physical disengagement than disclosers in both the introductory and substantive phases. CONCLUSIONS Awareness of non-verbal behavior may help investigators identify reluctant children early in forensic interviews. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS There is substantial evidence that, when questioned by investigators, many children do not disclose that they have been abused. The early detection of reluctance to disclose may allow interviewers to alter their behavior, helping the children overcome their reluctance by providing non-suggestive support before the possibility of abuse is discussed. Of course, nonverbal behavior alone should not be used to assess children in investigative interviews. However, nonverbal cues may nonetheless provide additional information to interviewers and assist them in identifying reluctant children.

Biases in Judging Victims and Suspects Whose Statements Are Inconsistent

In this commentary, we point to similarities in characteristics of suspect and victim/witness statements and the underlying motivations of these individuals. Despite the similarities, there are differences in how such statements are evaluated by fact-finders and investigators. Retractions, for example, cast serious doubt on the credibility of victims/witnesses but appear not to diminish the power of confessions. Investigators need to recognize the wide range of motivations behind statements made to the authorities and be mindful of biased dispositions to doubt victims and believe confessors, especially when their statements are inconsistent or retracted. An investigative process that was entirely transparent would help ensure that inconsistencies and retractions, whether in statements from victims, witnesses, or suspects, are viewed in the context of other statements and eliciting circumstances.

Children's Memory and Event Reports: The Current State of Knowledge and Best Practice

Decades of research on childrens eyewitness reports highlight a multitude of influences on the accuracy of childrens memory. Given the significance of childrens eyewitness testimony in criminal and social service investigations of maltreatment, as well as of other crimes, the task of eliciting accurate reports while still considering childrens needs can be quite daunting for interviewers. Researchers stress the importance of taking into account childrens abilities and limitations as well as external influences, including from the interview context. In this article, the authors review scientific research within the study of childrens eyewitness memory and suggestibility, examining both cognitive and sociomotivational influences on childrens reports. They also review studies of child forensic interview protocols and describe current best practices for interviewers who have the crucial task of questioning child witnesses.

Taking the blame for someone else's wrongdoing: the effects of age and reciprocity

False confessions are often involved in wrongful convictions and are sometimes made to protect someone else (i.e., the guilty), perhaps as a way of reciprocating past favors. Experimental research has neglected to investigate false confessions made to protect someone else, including among adolescents who may be particularly vulnerable given their peer orientation and sensitivity to peer influence. The present study examined (a) how often individuals would falsely confess to take the blame for anothers wrongdoing, and (b) whether the willingness to falsely confess would vary by age group and reciprocity. Adult (n = 99, M age = 20.29) and adolescent (n = 74, M age = 15.47) participants were randomly assigned to either receive or not receive a small favor from a confederate, witnessed the confederate cheat on a task, and then decided whether to sign a statement taking the blame for the confederates cheating. Adolescents (59%) were more likely to falsely confess than adults (39%). No effect of reciprocity was found. Although a well-documented phenomenon in legal cases and field studies, the present study provides the first experimental evidence concerning voluntary false confessions to protect another, including developmental differences in this tendency. Results highlight the vulnerability of youth and the potential role of peers in legal decision making.

Children's recantation of adult wrongdoing: an experimental investigation

Child maltreatment cases often hinge on a childs word versus a defendants word, making childrens disclosures crucially important. There is considerable debate concerning why children recant allegations, and it is imperative to examine recantation experimentally. The purpose of this laboratory analogue investigation was to test (a) how often children recant true allegations of an adults wrongdoing after disclosing and (b) whether childrens age and caregiver supportiveness predict recantation. During an interactive event, 6- to 9-year-olds witnessed an experimenter break a puppet and were asked to keep the transgression a secret. Children were then interviewed to elicit a disclosure of the transgression. Mothers were randomly assigned to react supportively or unsupportively to this disclosure, and children were interviewed again. We coded childrens recantations (explicit denials of the broken puppet after disclosing) and changes in their forthcomingness (shifts from denial or claims of lack of knowledge/memory to disclosure and vice versa) in free recall and in response to focused questions about the transgression. Overall, 23.3% of the children recanted their prior disclosures (46% and 0% in the unsupportive and supportive conditions, respectively). No age differences in recantation rates emerged, but 8- and 9-year-olds were more likely than 6- and 7-year-olds to maintain their recantation throughout Interview 2. Children whose mothers reacted supportively to disclosure became more forthcoming in Interview 2, and those whose mothers reacted unsupportively became less forthcoming. Results advance theoretical understanding of how children disclose negative experiences, including sociomotivational influences on their reports, and have practical implications for the legal system.

Familial Influences on Recantation in Substantiated Child Sexual Abuse Cases

The underlying reasons for recantation in children’s disclosure of child sexual abuse (CSA) have been debated in recent years. In the present study, we examined the largest sample of substantiated CSA cases involving recantations to date (n = 58 cases). We specifically matched those cases to 58 nonrecanters on key variables found to predict recantation in prior research (i.e., child age, alleged parent figure perpetrator, and caregiver unsupportiveness). Bivariate analyses revealed that children were less likely to recant when they were (1) initially removed from home postdisclosure and (2) initially separated from siblings postdisclosure. Multivariate analyses revealed that children were less likely to recant when family members (other than the nonoffending caregiver) expressed belief in the children’s allegations and more likely to recant when family members (other than the nonoffending caregiver) expressed disbelief in the allegations and when visitations with the alleged perpetrator were recommended at their first hearing. Results have implications for understanding the complex ways in which social processes may motivate some children to retract previous reports of sexual abuse.

“How” and “Why” prompts in forensic investigative interviews with preschool children

ABSTRACT Although young children may frequently be asked “How” and “Why” questions, it is unclear whether they have the ability to respond well enough to justify the use of these words during investigative interviews. The range of possible uses and interpretations of the words “How” and “Why” makes it critical to examine their use when communicatively immature children are interviewed. In this study, police interviews of 3- to 5-year-old suspected victims of sexual abuse (n = 49) were examined. The use of How/Why prompts by interviewers and children’s responses to interviewers’ How/Why prompts were coded. How/Why prompts represented 22% of all interviewer prompts. Of all details provided by children, however, 8.5% were in response to How/Why prompts. In addition, children provided the information sought in response to only 20% of the interviewers’ How/Why prompts, whereas uninformative responses were relatively common. Children responded to more How/Why prompts with the information sought by interviewers as they grew older. The findings suggest that How/Why prompts may not be particularly effective when interviewing preschool children.