Addressing the negative effect of cross-examination questioning on children's accuracy: can we intervene?
This study investigated whether preinterview interventions could help to facilitate children's accuracy under cross-examination-style questioning. Five- and 6-year-olds (n = 77; mean [SD] age = 5.84 [0.48] years; 57% boys) and 9- and 10-year-olds (n = 87; mean [SD] age = 10.30 [0.54] years; 56% boys) took part in a staged event and were then interviewed with analogues of direct examination and cross-examination. In a pilot study, we ascertained that a brief verbal warning about the nature of cross-examination-given immediately prior to the cross-examination interview-did not influence children's cross-examination accuracy, regardless of whether it was delivered by an unfamiliar interviewer or the cross-examining interviewer. In the main experiment, some children participated in a brief intervention involving practice and feedback with cross-examination questions. Relative to control children, those who underwent this preparation intervention made fewer changes to their direct-examination responses under cross-examination, changed a smaller proportion of their correct responses, and obtained higher ultimate accuracy levels. These findings provide some support for the notion that pretrial interventions, if sufficiently comprehensive, could help children to maintain accuracy during cross-examination.
Department of Psychology, University of Otago.
Saskia
S
Righarts
Sarah
S
O'Neill
Rachel
R
Zajac
D002648:Child; D003142:Communication; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D003416:Criminal Law; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011939:Mental Recall; D009520:New Zealand; D010565:Persuasive Communication; D010865:Pilot Projects; D014342:Truth Disclosure