Much of the improvement in child witness interviewing in England and Wales has been based on the findings of psychological research concerning memory and language. However, relatively little research has been conducted on the possible influence of interviewer style or manner. This article reviews the limited previous research on this topic and presents a new study. It seems that an authoritative interviewing style may increase children's errors to suggestive questions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BullR. (1992). Obtaining information expertly. Expert Evidence, 1, 5–12.
2.
BullR. (1996). Good practice for video recorded interviews with child witnesses for use in criminal proceedings. In DaviesG.Lloyd-BostockS.McMurranM.WilsonC. (Eds.), Psychology, law and criminal justice. Berlin: de Gruyter.
3.
BullR. (2002). Applying psychology to crime investigation: The case of police interviewing. In McKenzieI.BullR. (Eds), Criminal justice research: Inspiration, influence and ideation. Aldershot: Ashgate.
4.
CarterC.BottomsB.LevineM. (1996). Linguistic and socioemotional influences on the accuracy of children's reports. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 335–358.
5.
CeciS.BruckM. (1993). Suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403–439.
6.
CeciS.BruckM. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children's testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
CeciS.RossD.TogliaM. (1987). Age differences in suggestibility: Psychological implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 38–49.
8.
CialdiniR. (1995). Principles and techniques of social influence. In TesslerA. (Ed.) Advanced social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
CialdiniR. (2001). Influence: Science and practice (4th edn). New York: Allyn and Bason.
10.
DavisS.BottomsB. (2002). Effects of social support on children's eyewitness reports: A test of the underlying mechanism. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 185–215.
11.
Doherty-SneddonG.McAuleyS. (2000). Influence of video-mediation on adult-child interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 379–392.
12.
GoodmanG.BottomsB.Schwartz-KenneyB.RudyL. (1991). Children's testimony for a stressful event: Improving children's reports. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 1, 69–99.
13.
GudjonssonG. (1988). Compliance in an interrogative setting: A new scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 535–540.
14.
GudjonssonG. (1992). The psychology of interrogations, confessions and testimony. Chichester: Wiley.
15.
GudjonssonG. (1999). Police interviewing and disputed confessions. In MemonA.BullR. (Eds.) Handbook of the psychology of interviewing. Chichester: Wiley.
16.
Home Office. (2002). Achieving hard evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance for vulnerable or intimidated witnesses, including children. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
17.
Home Office and Department of Health. (1992). Memorandum of good practice on video recorded interviews with child witnesses for criminal proceedings. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
18.
ImhoffM.Baker-WardL. (1999). Preschoolers' suggestibility: Effects of developmentally appropriate language and supportiveness. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 407–429.
19.
LataneB. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343–356.
20.
MeyerJ.JesilowP. (1996). Obedience to authority: Possible effects on children's testimony. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, 81–95.
21.
MilgramS. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper and Row.
22.
MilneR.BullR. (1999). Investigative interviewing: Psychology and practice. Chichester: Wiley.
23.
O'BarrW. (1982). Linguistic evidence: Language, power and strategy in the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
24.
PooleD.LambM. (1998). Investigative interviews with children: A guide for helping professionals. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25.
QuasJ.EisenM.RiversV. (2000). The influence of interviewer-provided social support on maltreated children's memory and suggestibility. Paper presented at the Biennial Convention of the American Psychology – Law Society, New Orleans.
26.
RicciC. M.BealC. R.DekleD. J. (1996). The effect of parent versus unfamiliar interviewers on young witnesses' memory and identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 20(5), 483–500.
27.
RicciC.PacificoJ.KatzS. (1997). Effect of interview setting and questioning techniques on children's eyewitness memory and identification accuracy. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
28.
ShanabM.YahyaK. (1977). A behavioural study of obedience in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 530–536.
29.
TempletonV.HuntV. (1997). The effects of misleading information and level of authority of interviewer on children's witness memory. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
30.
TobeyA.GoodmanG. (1992). Children's eyewitness memory: Effect of participation and forensic context. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 807–821.
31.
WestcottH.DaviesG. (1996). Child witness memory: Peer versus adult interviewers. In ClarkN.StephensonG. (Eds), Investigative and forensic decision making. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
