children and the law

issues with child eyewitnesses

issues with child eyewitnesses

struggle with same aspects of face recognition as adults, but with greater effects
- safeguards recommended for adults are insufficient for children (e.g. may or may not be present)
- children prefer to choose when presented with choosing task

wildcard option

provided in lineups (unknown person) who children can choose if they are unsure

padding sequential lineups

add several blank photo cards at the end of the lineup so children do not know how many options they have

blank lineup

give them a lineup that is only fillers before presenting the real lineup
- tells us about response bias and memory strength

earwitnesses

overhear conversations made by criminal during crime
- children often hear things as adults do not take them into consideration
- present lineup of voices saying phrase

role of children in legal system

- face/voice recognition
- victims/reporters of crime
- investigative interview participation
- provide evidence + help construct narrative
- testimony in court

case study (kidnapping of elizabeth smart)

demonstrate how children recall events and how others perceive their recalling
- both victim and witness were children; concerned about accuracy + credibility
- gave lots of info about perpetrator but much of it was inaccurate

factors that explain inaccuracy of children's memory

- very suggestible: used to adults orders
- poor source monitoring: reality and imagination are blurred
- poor comprehension of situations/concepts
- vulnerable: not capable of knowing what is or is not okay

what increases suggestibility in children?

- use of leading questions
- repeated interviews
- imagination-based retrieval techniques
- presence of authority figure
- peer influence

archaeological dig study (principe & ceci)

dr. diggs 'accidentally' spilled a drink on an artifact, using plastic utensils to dig for it
- some were witnesses, others were told abt it
results: peer influence + suggestive questions = large effect on false reports of observing the event by those who were only told abt it

sam stone study (leichtman & ceci)

sam stone came for 2min visit to classes w/ 3-4yr olds or 5-6yr olds split into four groups:
- control: no pre-visit suggestion + nonsuggestive interview
- pre-visit suggestion (sam is clumsy)
- post-visit suggestion
- pre- and post-visit suggestion
all interviewed 4x over 10 weeks
results:
- very few false allegations in control and pre-visit conditions
- many false allegations in post-visit condition
- highest rate when pre-visit and post-visit were combined

protectors against suggestibility (individual factors)

- provides descriptive narratives
- assertive personality
- corrects the interviewer
- seeks clarification when unsure
- sometimes says "no" to yes/no q's
- chooses when given MC options
- willing to answer "i don't know"

NICHD protocol

investigative interview methods designed for child witnesses
open-ended > closed-ended > leading questions (if needed)
- encourage narrative response + report via recall
- allow them to talk about topics they wish; do not constrain

interview prompt styles (NICHD)

- invitation (classic, open-ended questions)
- facilitator (acknowledge what was said and encourage to continue)
- cued invitation (incorporates prev. reported detail with open-ended q's)
- directive (request specific info about prev. reported detail)

interview phases (NICHD)

1. pre-substantive: intro, ground rules, build rapport, and practice interview
2. substantive: transition, investigate incidents, focused q's, and disclosures
3. closing: explain and finish with neutral topic

benefits of repeated interviewing

- reminiscence: recall smt new and accurate in later interviews
- practice recalling inoculates against forgetting

drawbacks of repeated interviewing

- suggestive methods will exacerbate effects
- closed-ended q's may reduce accuracy

interviews on repeated events (recommended approach)

ppl tend to view child victims of SA as less credible as it is hard to report each event accurately
1. practice interview about a neutral instance of a repeated event (e.g. weekly soccer practice)
2. ask about memorable instances of abuse or the first/last instance

repression

basic defence mechanism where one pushes traumatic, painful, and threatening memories into their unconscious, while showing signs of mental illness
- little evidence of repression in memory research; implanted?

is repression real? (news article)

nicole recovered memories of childhood abuse by her mother at 17 years old
- still unsure if her memories were true
- dr. loftus concluded that it was most likely false and implanted, most likely due to suggestive interviewing in therapy

false memories

recalling an event that never happened
- techniques used to uncover repressed memories may lead to implanted, false memories
- research investigating false memories is less suggestive than real techniques

false memories experiments

1. obtain info about true childhood events from family
2. provide info about 4 childhood events (3 real, 1 false)
3. asked participants to recall details of these events
~25% reported false memory in past experiments

evaluating recovered memories

- age of the complainant at time of alleged abuse
- techniques used to recover memory
- similarity of reports across interview sessions
- motivation for recall
- time elapsed since alleged abuse

child witness testimony in trials

historically, there is distrust of children (though adults are more likely to lie)
- required corroboration of evidence in addition to testimony
- recent complaint doctrine

recent complaint doctrine

requires victims to make a complaint at first possible opportunity
- though children are likely to delay disclosing
- now discontinued

child competency experiment

children left alone with toy and told not to peek
- asked to discuss concept of truth + promise to tell truth
- then asked if they peeked
concluded: promise to tell truth increased truth-telling

historical approach to child testimonies

- must demonstrate capacity to testify
- must take oath + answer questions abt it
- must promise to tell the truth + answer questions abt it

current approach to child testimonies

- presumed to have capacity to testify
- no oath; just promise to tell the truth
- competent if they can understand + respond to simple q's abt past events

testimonial aids (child testimony)

procedures to help reduce stress and trauma
- support person/animal
- testifying behind a screen, via CCTV, or videotaped
- closed courtroom
- protection of children's wellbeing > defendant's right to face accuser

perceived credibility of children

Cognitive Capability
- increases with age
Honesty
- seen as more honest; unable to fabricate details of certain events
Suggestibility
- seen as more open to suggestion