children as victims offenders, dundundunnn, witness Flashcards
(89 cards)
The Martensville Babysitting Case
R. v. Sterling (1995)
Ms. ‘L’ noticed a rash on her toddler, suspected
child abuse of her daycare provider
Several claims made against Linda, Ron, and Travis
Sterling
Children stated:
◦ They had been touched
◦ Confined in cages, forced to drink blood
◦ Whipped, thrown naked into freezers
◦ Ritual murder, dog stabbed to death, nipple bitten off
Expert witness stated that interviews were too
leading
Fabrication
Making false claims
Interviewing Children
When given an opportunity to use free narrative, children’s accuracy for
events are comparable to adults
◦ However, very little information is provided
We want to avoid:
◦ Leading questions
◦ Approving or disapproving responses
◦ Repeated interviewing close in time with event
◦ Yes/No questions?
Waterman et al. (2004)
Children 5 to 9 years old
10-minute discussion with
experimenter
Shown pictures of 2 foods, 2 pets
Yes/No questions – “Did the lady
show you a picture of a banana?”
Wh- questions – “What was the
lady’s name?”
Half of each type were unknown
to children
Why are children more suggestible? (2)
Social compliance
Changes to Cognitive System
social compliance
Trust and want to cooperate with adult interviewers
◦ Is milk bigger than water? Is red heavier than yellow?
Changes to Cognitive System
Children may encode, store, and retrieve memories
differently
◦ Children more likely to misattribute where information
came from
Interviewing Techniques - Anatomically Detailed Dolls
Mixed results
◦ Some believe that could be
associated with adverse effects
◦ Not much consistency in use or
structure
Interviewing Techniques
Statement Validity Analysis (SVA):
a protocol to distinguish truthful or false
statements made by children
Structured Interview with Victim
Systematic analysis of verbal content
Statement Validity Checklist
Criterion-Based Content Analysis (CBCA):
uses criteria to distinguish truthful
from false statements made by children
(comes from systematic analysis of verbal content)
Interviewing Techniques: CBCA
(Underlying Assumption)
descriptions of real events differ in quality and
content from memories that are fabricated
Interviewing Techniques: CBCA
critisism
May be less effective for younger children
◦ Inconsistencies with criteria that is considered ‘truthful’
◦ Highly subjective, low inter-rater reliability
Narrative Elaboration (interview technique)
nterview procedure whereby children learn to
organize their story into relevant categories
‘Does this card remind you to tell
something else?’
Tested with a staged event, 3 conditions
◦ Narrative Elaborations
◦ Cards alone
◦ Standard interview
salem witch trials and kids
children said they saw crazy things but they retracted them when they grew up
kinda lead to children and suggestability idea
are children capable of accurtatly reaclling relevant info
yes
children 4-6 vs 9-10 and recalling people
age 4-6 is only 1 desrciber
age 9-10 uses 2.5 descriptos
hair most popular
older = interior features (nose, eyes, freckles)
both = exterior (hair)
what do childre struggle w when desriibng
height and weight
they dont undertsand that tall is heavy and short is light
only in adolescnce can we ask about weight
if children are given positive and negative information what are they likely to report
the positive info
children with free narrative
can be comparable to adults
what kids are most sucesspitble to leading q
younger kids
when will kids change stories
if the interviews are too close in time
“tell me everything about your day” kids vs adults
kids less detail adults more details
answerable q vs not answerable q and yes/no vs wh q
if answerable its the same
if not answerable then the yes/no is much worse bc the kids feel trapped and they dont wanna idk like they can do in a wh- q
impossible q
5-7 yrs still answer the q
