Children's Understanding of Indirect Attacks on Credibility

Arizona State University, Scottsdale AZ

Investigators

Abstract

When children allege sexual abuse, their report becomes central to assessing whether the crime occurred. However, children are susceptible to suggestion -- both from those who aim to influence their reports and those who aim to establish what children are alleging. Given children's susceptibility to courtroom questioning, the manner in which children are questioned about prior suggestive influence is incredibly important. How do children understand when attorneys are attacking the credibility of their reports, and how does the subtle phrasing of attacks influence children's responses? This investigation will assess how attorneys are questioning children in recent cases of alleged sexual abuse, as well as how children understand and respond to such questions. The findings can provide concrete recommendations for those questioning children about alleged crimes, helping to establish productive techniques that elicit accurate responses. In doing so, the proposed research has the potential to improve legal decision making in cases involving children, by providing questioning methods that better distinguish true from false allegations of abuse. The researchers will utilize a mixed-methods approach. First they will conduct a systematic field assessment of how children are questioned in recent cases of alleged abuse. The findings will provide an indication of the frequency, content, context, and responsiveness to such assessments of credibility about suggestive influence. Second, a series of laboratory studies will assess children's comprehension and response patterns to such questions, with the materials developed in tandem with the findings from the field assessment to approximate courtroom questioning. In the laboratory studies, the researchers will also include questioning alternatives not used frequently by attorneys. Such findings will assess the boundaries on what children understand. Furthermore, doing so can result in producing alternatives that meet the needs of legal actors questioning children about suggestive influence, while allowing children to provide accurate and complete responses. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.