We compared 42 transcripts of sexual abuse interviews conducted by child protective services personnel in one state to practices currently recommended by researchers on children's testimony. Although the majority of the interviewers attempted to establish rapport, they rarely conducted practice interviews regarding past, neutral events, and rarely informed children that “I don't know,”“I don't understand,” and “I don't remember” are acceptable answers to questions. Further, the majority of the interviewers failed to begin their abuse-related questioning with general, open-ended questions, instead relying primarily on specific, yes/no questions throughout the interview. Finally, interviewers frequently introduced new material not previously disclosed by the children and failed to clarify the sources of new information.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boat, B. W.
, & Everson, M. D. (1993). The use of anatomical dolls in sexual abuse evaluations: Current research and practice. In G. S. Goodman & B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony (pp. 47-69). New York: Guilford.
2.
Brennan, M.
, & Brennan, R. (1988). Strange language: Child victims under cross examination. Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia: Charles Sturt University-Riverina.
3.
Bruck, M.
, & Ceci, S. J. (1995). Brief on behalf of amicus developmental, social, and psychological researchers, social scientists, and scholars. Psychology, Public Policy, and the Law, 1, 1-51.
4.
Bruck, M.
, Ceci, S. J., Francoeur, E., & Renick, A. (1995). Anatomically detailed dolls do not facilitate preschoolers' reports of a pediatric examination involving genital touching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 95-109.
5.
Carter, C. A.
, Bottoms, B. L., & Levine, M. (in press). Linguistic and socio-emotional influences on the accuracy of children's reports. Law and Human Behavior.
6.
Ceci, S. J.
, & Bruck, M. (1993). The suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403-439.
7.
Ceci, S. J.
, & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children's testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
8.
Cohen, J.
(1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213-220.
9.
Conte, J. R.
, Sorenson, E., Fogarty, L., & Dalla Rosa, J. (1991). Evaluating children's reports of sexual abuse: Results from a survey of professionals. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 428-437.
10.
DeLoache, J.
(1995). The use of dolls in interviewing young children. In M. S. Zaragoza, J. R. Graham, G.C.N. Hall, R. Hirschman, & Y. S. Ben-Porath (Eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 160-178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Dent, H.
(1991). Experimental studies of interviewing child witnesses. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections: Implications for eyewitness testimony (pp. 138-146). New York: Springer-Verlag.
12.
DeVoe, E.
, & Faller, K. C. (1995, July). Questioning strategies in interviews with children who may have been sexually abused. Paper presented at the International Conference on Family Violence Research, University of New Hampshire.
13.
Fisher, R. P.
, & McCauley, M. R. (1995). Improving eyewitness testimony with the cognitive interview. In M. S. Zaragoza, J. R. Graham, G.C.N. Hall, R. Hirschman, & Y. S. Ben-Porath (Eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 141-159). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Garbarino, J.
, & Stott, F. M. (1989). What children can tell us. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
Geiselman, R. E.
, & Padilla, J. (1988). Cognitive interviewing with child witnesses. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 16, 236-242.
16.
Geiselman, R. E.
, Saywitz, K. J., & Bornstein, G. K. (1993). Effects of cognitive questioning techniques on children's recall performance. In G. S. Goodman & B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony (pp. 71-93). New York: Guilford.
17.
Home Office and Department of Health
. (1992). Memorandum of good practice: On video recorded interviews with child witnesses for criminal proceedings. London: Author.
18.
Hughes, M.
, & Grieve, R. (1980). On asking children bizarre questions. First Language, 1, 149-160.
19.
Koehnken, G.
(1993). The cognitive interview: A step-by-step introduction. Unpublished training materials, University of Kiel, Germany.
20.
Koehnken, G.
(1995, July). A phased approach to interview training. In G. Koehnken (Chair), Delivery of interviewing skills. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
21.
Lamb, M. E.
, Hershkowitz, I., Sternberg, K. J., Esplin, P. W., Hovav, M., Manor, T., & Yudilevitch, L. (in press). Effects of investigative utterance types on Israeli children's responses. International Journal of Behavioral Development.
22.
Montoya, J.
(1993). Something not so funny happened on the way to conviction: The pretrial interrogation of child witnesses. Arizona Law Review, 35, 927-987.
23.
Moston, S.
(1987). The suggestibility of children in interview studies. First Language, 7, 67-78.
24.
Moston, S.
(1990). How children interpret and respond to questions: Situational sources of suggestibility in eyewitness interviews. Social Behavior, 5, 155-167.
25.
Myers, J.E.B.
(1994). Taint hearings for child witnesses? A step in the wrong direction. Baylor Law Review, 46, 873-946.
26.
Perry, N. W.
, & Hunt, J. S. (in press). Interviewing child victim-witnesses: What you ask is what you get. In C. P. Thompson, D. Bruce, J. D. Read, D. Payne, M. Herrmann, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Proceedings of the Meeting of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27.
Perry, N. W.
, McAuliff, B., Tam, P., Claycomb, L., Dostal, C., & Flanagan, C. (1995). When lawyers question children: Is justice served?Law and Human Behavior, 19, 609-629.
28.
Saywitz, K. J.
(1990). The child as witness: Experimental and clinical considerations. In A. M. LaGreca (Ed.), Through the eyes of the child: Obtaining self-reports from children and adolescents (pp. 329-367). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
29.
Saywitz, K. J.
(1995). Improving children's testimony: The question, the answer, and the environment. In M. S. Zaragoza, J. R. Graham, G.C.N. Hall, R. Hirschman, & Y. S. Ben-Porath (Eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 113-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Saywitz, K. J.
, Goodman, G. S., Nicholas, E., & Moan, S. (1991). Children's memories of physical examinations that involve genital touch: Implications for reports of sexual abuse. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 682-691.
31.
Sorenson, T.
, & Snow, B. (1991). How children tell: The process of disclosure in child sexual abuse. Child Welfare, 70, 3-15.
32.
State v. Michaels, 625 A.2d 489 (N.J. App. 1993), aff'd, 1994 WL 278424 (N.J. Sup. 1994).
33.
Steller, M.
, & Boychuk, T. (1992). Children as witnesses in sexual abuse cases: Investigative interview and assessment techniques. In H. Dent & R. Flin (Eds.), Children as witnesses (pp. 47-71). Chichester, England: Wiley.
34.
Sternberg, K.
, Lamb, M., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., Hovav, M., & Esplin, P. (1996, February). Effects of introductory style on children's accounts of sexual abuse. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Hilton Head, South Carolina.
35.
Toglia, M. P.
, Ross, D. F., Ceci, S. J., & Hembrooke, H. (1992). The suggestibility of children's memory: A social-psychological and cognitive interpretation. In M. L. Howe, C. J. Brainerd, & V. F. Reyna (Eds.), Development of long-term retention (pp. 217-241). New York: Springer-Verlag.
36.
Vrij, A.
(1996, February). Does an explanation of conversation rules reduce suggestibility in child witnesses? Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Hilton Head, South Carolina.
37.
Walker, A. G.
(1994). Handbook on questioning children: The linguistic perspective. Washington, DC: American Bar Association.
38.
Walker, A. G.
, & Warren, A. R. (1995). The language of the child abuse interview: Asking the questions, understanding the answers. In T. Ney (Ed.), True and false allegations of child sexual abuse: Assessment and case management (pp. 153-162). New York: Brunner Mazel.
39.
Warren, A. R.
, Hulse-Trotter, K., & Tubbs, E. (1991). Inducing resistance to suggestibility in children. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 273-285.
40.
Warren, A. R.
, & McGough, L. S. (1996). Research on children's suggestibility: Implications for the investigative interview. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 269-303.
41.
Warren, A. R.
, Perry, N. W., Nelson, D. H., Porter, C., Elliott, K., Komori, L., Hunt, J., Gleason, T., Galas, J., & Kellen, L. (1995, June). Interviewing children: Questions of structure and style. Poster presented at the Third National Colloquium of the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, Tucson, Arizona.
42.
Wolfner, G.
, Faust, D., & Dawes, R. (1993). The use of anatomical dolls in sexual abuse evaluations: The state of the science. Applied and Preventative Psychology, 2, 1-11.
43.
Yuille, J. C.
, Hunter, R., Joffe, R., & Zaparniuk, J. (1993). Interviewing children in sexual abuse cases. In G. S. Goodman & B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony (pp. 95-115). New York: Guilford.
