Children as Witnesses

Reliability of Children as Witnesses: External Factors

Video Example:
- Children watching a video of a boy stealing a girl's bike.
- Interviewed using the NICHD protocol with variations in follow-up questions (open-ended, closed, leading).
- Demonstrated different responses to the same question, including incorrect answers and susceptibility to misleading questions.
- Highlighted the potential for children to provide convincing but inaccurate accounts.
Impact of External Factors on Suggestibility:
- Leading Questions:
  - Children may agree due to trust or lack of confidence in their memory.
  - Incorporation of misinformation into future accounts with conviction.
- Repeated Questions:
  - If no initial response: child provides an answer to meet expectations, even if incorrect.
  - If initial response given: child changes answer, assuming the first was wrong.
  - Mitigation: explain to the child that repetition isn't due to incorrectness or to invite different answers, but because you didn't hear them correctly.
  - Investigators may rephrase questions, but the impact remains the same.
  - Both verbatim and gist repetition have negative impacts.
- Repeated Interviews:
  - Problematic if leading questions are used, increasing familiarity and conviction in inaccurate details.
  - Beneficial if only accurate details are discussed, reinforcing accurate information.
- Delay:
  - Memory deteriorates, increasing vulnerability to suggestion.
  - Prompt interviews are crucial.
- Interviewer Bias:
  - Seeking evidence to support preconceived ideas, hindering neutral exploration.
  - Leads to problematic interviewer behaviors and false accusations.
- Stereotype Induction:
  - Feeding negative perceptions, influencing the child to align with expectations.
  - Sam Stone study example: negative stereotypes leading to false accusations.
  - Daycare cases: initial suggestion of a daycare worker being bad influencing the child's responses.
- Interviewer Status:
  - Misuse of authority can motivate the child to impress and disclose desired information.
  - Daycare cases: police offering badges to children for desired information.
- Emotional Tone:
  - Inconsistent emotional tone from the interviewer when children are providing evidence can be problematic.
  - Consistent encouragement and feedback are essential, regardless of the child's statements.

Individual Differences in Suggestibility: Internal Factors

Age:
- Younger children tend to be more suggestible than older children.
Cognitive Skills:
- Strong language abilities are a protective factor against suggestibility.
- Higher memory abilities reduce vulnerability to suggestion.
- Higher IQ is also a protective factor, especially when comparing average IQ children to intellectually disabled children, who are more vulnerable to suggestion.
Attachment:
- Insecure attachment is associated with higher suggestibility.
- Anxious attachment: children eager to please are more vulnerable to suggestion and false memory implantation.
Creativity:
- More creative, fantasy-prone children are more vulnerable to suggestion and false memory implantation.
- Vivid imaginations may make suggested information more salient and corruptive.
Temperament:
- Behavioral styles (shyness, sociability, distractibility) may influence suggestibility.

Temperament: 6 Dimensions of Temperament

Based on Roy Martin's model of temperament & the New York Longitudinal Study.
- Activity:
  - Hyperactivity vs. quiet play.
  - High activity may lead to poorer eyewitness performance due to inattention.
- Emotionality:
  - Intensity of emotional displays.
  - Complex relation to suggestibility: both low and high emotionality have been linked to higher suggestibility in different studies.
  - Difficult to study due to ethical constraints in experiments.
- Persistence:
  - Willingness to persist with challenging tasks or arguments.
  - Higher persistence reduces suggestibility.
- Adaptability:
  - Speed of adapting to new environments.
  - Higher adaptability reduces vulnerability to suggestion.
- Shyness:
  - Fear of social judgment and inhibition.
  - Higher shyness may increase vulnerability to leading questions.
  - Adaptability and shyness was combined and called social flexibility, referring to low shyness and high adaptability
- Distractibility:
  - Difficulty maintaining attention.
  - Higher distractibility may increase suggestibility.
These factors can influence encoding (during the event) and performance during the interview.
Temperament also impacts interviewer behavior, such as asking more leading questions to shy children.

Research Study on Children's Eyewitness Memory

202 children (ages 4-8) watched a video of a boy stealing a girl's bike.
Interviews followed the NICHD protocol with varied follow-up questions: open-ended, closed-ended, and misleading.
Coded information as correct, incorrect, or accurate percentage.
Correct information:
- No significant difference between open-ended and closed-ended groups.
- Significantly lower for the misleading group.
Incorrect information:
- Significant differences between all groups.
- Higher errors in close-ended and misleading groups.
Overall accuracy:
- Open-ended group: 85% accuracy.
- Close-ended group: 78% accuracy.
- Misleading group: 63% accuracy.

Temperament and Accuracy

Challenge: Accurately measuring temperament in young children.
Self-reports were used (picture book with statements).
Findings:
- Distractibility led to more errors and lower accuracy overall.
- Adaptability and persistence in the misleading group resulted in more correct information and resistance to misleading questions.
- Children who were less adaptable and more distractible gave more errors and were overall less accurate when exposed to misleading questions.
Hope: Research should focus on tailoring interviews to suit children's needs based on temperament.
- Experiment with multiple short breaks for distractible children
- Interviews at home for children who are less adaptable

Children in the Courtroom

In sexual abuse cases, children's testimony is often the only evidence.
Prosecutors proceed in only about one-third of cases.
Young children are generally seen as honest but their memory is not trusted in the courtroom.
Confidence is a persuasive factor, despite the weak association between confidence and accuracy, which is even weaker in children.
Leading questions can undermine perceived confidence.
Emotionality (crying) can influence jury perceptions.
Female jurors are more likely to find victim witnesses credible in sexual assault cases.
Older jurors may be less likely to believe accusations of sexual abuse.

Key Recommendations (Follow best practice and certain recommendations to protect children witnesses)

Avoid suggestive questions and minimize closed-ended questions.
Use a structured format (NICHD protocol and follow it exactly.).
Avoid repeating questions or explain why repetition is needed (either because you did not hear the child, not that you require a different answer.).
Make accommodations based on temperament.
Avoid delay, interviewing the child as quickly as possible.
Avoid external pressures such as peer pressure or rewards.
Lineup procedures should follow recommendations + introduce "still away" mystery card.
Do not undermine the child during cross-examination.

Forensic Psychology: Potential Career Paths

Academia: Research and teaching.
Criminal Investigations: Providing guidance, profiling, psychological autopsies (determining mode of death).
Forensic Evaluator: Completing assessments for courts (competency to stand trial, legal insanity).
$Note: Requires doctorial level education$
Prison Environment: Facilitating interventions and rehabilitation programs.

Requirements for Pursuing a Career in Psychology/ Clinical Psychology

Abnormal Psychology Course
Clinical Psychology (masters with concentration in forensics).
Courses in Psychotherapy and Counseling.
Experience with a forensic population- Volunteer organizations, research, prison environment (humanities society at Clemson provides this opportunity).
Undergraduate knowledge applicable to related fields: police officer, drug rehabilitation counselor, crime analyst, prison officer.

Examples of pathways into forensic psychology:

Graduate school in forensic psychology:
- Volunteering as a restorative justice practitioner and a prison monitor.
- Ph. D in psychology with a forensic concentration to be able to teach.
Establish a forensic program at ASU or work as an evaluator for the courts:
- Masters in clinical psychology with a concentration in law.
- PHD in clinical psychology with a concentration in law.
- Post doctorate at the University of Massachusetts Medical School (experience with a forensic population).