Relations between Attorney Temporal Structure and Children's Response Productivity in Cases of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse.

J Zoe Klemfuss, Kyndra C Cleveland, Jodi A Quas, Thomas D Lyon
Author Information
  1. J Zoe Klemfuss: Florida International University; Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.
  2. Kyndra C Cleveland: University of California, Irvine.
  3. Jodi A Quas: University of California, Irvine.
  4. Thomas D Lyon: University of Southern California.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Previous research has demonstrated that attorney question format relates to child witness' response productivity. However, little work has examined the relations between the extent to which attorneys provide temporal structure in their questions, and the effects of this structure on children's responding. The purpose of the present study was to address this gap in the literature in order to identify methods by which attorneys increase children's response productivity on the stand without risking objections from opposing counsel for "calling for narrative answers".
METHODS: In the present study we coded criminal court transcripts involving child witnesses (5-18 years) for narrative structure in attorney questions and productivity in children's responses. Half of the transcripts resulted in convictions, half in acquittals, balanced across key variables: child age, allegation severity, the child's relationship to the perpetrator, and the number of allegations.
RESULTS: Prosecutors and defense attorneys varied substantially in their questioning tactics. Prosecutors used more temporal structure in their questions and varied their questioning by the age of the child. These variations had implications for children's response productivity.
CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that temporal structure is a novel and viable method for enhancing children's production of case-relevant details on the witness stand.

Keywords

References

  1. Child Dev. 2007 Jul-Aug;78(4):1153-70 [PMID: 17650131]
  2. Dev Psychol. 2008 Sep;44(5):1442-56 [PMID: 18793075]
  3. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 1992;57(5):1-142; discussion 143-61 [PMID: 1470193]
  4. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2014 Jan 1;20(1):19-30 [PMID: 25242881]
  5. Child Abuse Negl. 2000 Dec;24(12):1631-48 [PMID: 11197041]
  6. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2012 Feb 1;18(1):79-104 [PMID: 22347789]
  7. Child Dev. 2014 Jul-Aug;85(4):1756-69 [PMID: 24467688]
  8. J Child Lang. 1999 Feb;26(1):49-67 [PMID: 10217889]
  9. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003 Oct;71(5):926-34 [PMID: 14516241]
  10. Psychol Rev. 2004 Apr;111(2):486-511 [PMID: 15065919]
  11. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2003 Sep;9(3):187-95 [PMID: 14570512]
  12. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2014 Sep-Oct;28(5):780-788 [PMID: 25866442]
  13. Child Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;76(1):40-53 [PMID: 15693756]
  14. Behav Res Methods. 2007 Feb;39(1):39-49 [PMID: 17552470]
  15. Child Dev. 2004 May-Jun;75(3):669-86 [PMID: 15144480]
  16. Child Dev. 2003 Sep-Oct;74(5):1297-313 [PMID: 14552399]
  17. Child Abuse Negl. 2007 Nov-Dec;31(11-12):1201-31 [PMID: 18023872]
  18. J Appl Psychol. 2001 Oct;86(5):997-1005 [PMID: 11596815]
  19. Child Abuse Negl. 2000 Jun;24(6):733-52 [PMID: 10888015]
  20. Child Maltreat. 2014 Jun 11;19(2):119-129 [PMID: 24920247]

Grants

  1. R01 HD047290/NICHD NIH HHS
  2. R01 HD087685/NICHD NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0structureproductivitychildren'schildresponsetemporalattorneyattorneysquestionsquestioningpresentstudystandnarrativetranscriptswitnessesageProsecutorsvariedChildPURPOSE:Previousresearchdemonstratedquestionformatrelateswitness'Howeverlittleworkexaminedrelationsextentprovideeffectsrespondingpurposeaddressgapliteratureorderidentifymethodsincreasewithoutriskingobjectionsopposingcounsel"callinganswers"METHODS:codedcriminalcourtinvolving5-18yearsresponsesHalfresultedconvictionshalfacquittalsbalancedacrosskeyvariables:allegationseveritychild'srelationshipperpetratornumberallegationsRESULTS:defensesubstantiallytacticsusedvariationsimplicationsCONCLUSIONS:Resultsindicatenovelviablemethodenhancingproductioncase-relevantdetailswitnessRelationsAttorneyTemporalStructureChildren'sResponseProductivityCasesAllegedSexualAbuselegaltestimony

Similar Articles

Cited By