The Effects of Practice on Children's Ability to Apply Ground Rules in a Narrative Interview

Using rapport building to improve information yield when interviewing adolescents: A systematic review and call for research

BACKGROUND

Adolescents frequently experience and witness violence and crime, yet very little research has been conducted to determine how best to question these witnesses to elicit complete and accurate disclosures.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review integrated scientific research on rapport building with child and adult witnesses with theory and research on adolescent development in order to identify rapport building techniques likely to be effective with suspected adolescent victims and witnesses.

METHOD

Four databases were searched to identify investigations of rapport building in forensic interviewing of adolescents.

RESULTS

Despite decades of research of studies including child and adult participants, only one study since 1990 experimentally tested techniques to build rapport with adolescents. Most rapport strategies used with children and adults have yet to be tested with adolescents. Tests of these strategies, along with modifications based on developmental science of adolescence, would provide a roadmap to determining which approaches are most beneficial when questioning adolescent victims and witnesses.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear need for research that tests what strategies are best to use with adolescents. They may be reluctant to disclose information about stressful or traumatic experiences to adults due to both normative developmental processes and the types of events about which they are questioned in legal settings. Rapport building approaches tailored to address adolescents' motivational needs may be effective in increasing adolescents' reporting, and additional research testing such approaches will provide much-needed insight to inform the development of evidence-based practices for questioning these youth.

Effects of Guiding Ground Rules and Individual Differences on the Accuracy of Children's Free Recall and Suggestibility

This research examines how the presence or absence of ground rules and children's temperamental tendencies affect children's free recall accuracy and suggestibility. Participating children showed richer free recall with open-ended questions and displayed greater resistance to suggestive questions when provided ground rules during the interview. In addition, children's recall accuracy varied based on their prosocial orientation: the presence or absence of ground rules influenced memory accuracy more in children with a low prosocial orientation than in those with a high prosocial orientation. These results demonstrate the importance of ground rules for obtaining reliable statements from children during investigative interviews. Findings further suggest that children can provide more detailed information when temperamental characteristics (e.g. prosocial tendencies) are considered.

Trauma narratives: recommendations for investigative interviewing

In the investigation of a criminal event, the police may encounter witnesses or victims experiencing symptoms of being traumatized (e.g. anxiety, intrusive thoughts or avoidance of trauma-related stimuli). This may pose a challenge in investigative interviews where police interviewers aim to obtain reliable and detailed accounts. Based on previous theory and research, this theoretical paper aims to outline recommendations for police interviewers for approaching traumatized adult witnesses to facilitate communication, attend to the well-being of the individual and reach investigative aims. First, factors considered important for preparing for the interview and building rapport are presented. Then, different aspects of how to facilitate the interviewee's account will be described with an emphasis on how police interviewers can approach emotional reactions to maintain rapport.

Developmental differences in children's learning and use of forensic ground rules during an interview about an experienced event

Children often answer questions when they do not have the requisite knowledge or when they do not understand them. We examined whether ground rules instruction—to say “I don’t know,” to tell the truth, and to correct the interviewer when necessary—assisted children in applying those rules during an interview about a past event and whether doing so was associated with more accurate accounts. We compared children with intellectual disabilities (mild or moderate severity, n = 44, 7–12 years) with 3 groups of typically developing children (2 matched for mental age, and 1 for chronological age, n = 55, 4–12 years) on their understanding of 3 ground rules, their use of these rules in an interview, and their accuracy in recalling a personally experienced event. Many children were able to demonstrate proficiency with the rules following simple instruction but others required additional teaching. Children applied the rules sparingly in the interview. Their scores on the practice trials of each rule were unrelated to each other, and to the use of the rules in context. Their developmental level was significantly related to both of these skills. Regression models showed that developmental level was the best predictor of children’s accuracy when they recounted their experience during the interview but that use of responses consistent with the rules, in conjunction with developmental level, predicted accurate resistance to suggestive questions. Future research should identify how best to prepare children of different ages and cognitive abilities to answer adults’ questions appropriately.

The effects of episode similarity on children's reports of a repeated event

Much research has tested techniques to improve children's reporting of episodes from a repeated event by interviewing children after they have experienced multiple episodes of a scripted event. However, these studies have not considered any effects of the similarity shared between event episodes on children's reports. In the current study, 5- to 9-year-olds experienced four episodes of a scripted repeated event that shared a high (n = 76) or low (n = 76) degree of similarity, and were subsequently interviewed about individual episodes. The proportional amount and accuracy of children's reported details were tallied. Children reported proportionally more details and more script deviations after experiencing the high, compared to low, similarity event. Conversely, children were more accurate in their episodic reports when they experienced the low, compared to high, similarity event. The current findings have implications for the generalisability and comparability of past results across laboratory studies.

A Comparison of Responses to Substantive Transition Prompts in Interviews With Children

This study examined children's responses to two alternate prompts used to transition to the substantive phase of an interview. Children ( N = 401) experienced four scripted events and were later interviewed. After rapport building, half of the children were asked, "Tell me what you're here to talk to me about today," whereas the other half were asked, "Tell me why you're here to talk to me today." Children's responses were coded as informative (e.g., nouns) or uninformative (e.g., "don't know"). The what prompt elicited more informative responses than the why prompt, and 7- to 9-year-olds were more informative than 5- to 6-year-olds regardless of the type of prompt they received. Given that the what prompt elicited more informative responses, the present study provides initial support for this phrasing when forensic interviewers transition to the substantive phase.

Judges' delivery of ground rules to child witnesses in Australian courts

Ground rules directions are given to children in forensic interviews to explain what is expected of them, and to reduce their tendency to acquiesce to erroneous or incomprehensible questions. Ground rules may also be necessary when children provide testimony in court. Drawing on research conducted for the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the present study examined the use of ground rules directions delivered in court in 52 trials by 24 presiding judges in three jurisdictions to 57 child complainants (aged 7-17.5 years). Eleven categories of rules were identified. The number of words spoken to deliver each rule was counted, and grade-level readability scores were calculated as a proxy for the complexity of the ground rules. When judges asked comprehension or practice questions, the question types were coded. More than one third of the children (35%) received no ground rules directions from the judge; the remaining 65% received directions on an average of 3.5 types of ground rules out of a maximum of 11 types. While comprehension questions were common, practice questions were rare. Comprehension questions were most often presented in a yes/no format that implied the expected response, although this form of question is unlikely to provide an effective assessment of a child's comprehension. Neither the number of rules delivered nor the number of words used was related to children's age. Implications for children's court testimony are discussed.

Children's Uncertain Responses when Testifying about Alleged Sexual Abuse in Scottish Courts

This study examined the uncertain responses of 56 alleged sexual abuse victims, aged 5-17 years, testifying in Scottish criminal court trials. Don't know/remember ground rules were explained to 38% of the children and each child reported uncertainty in response to 15% of the questions on average. Uncertain responding was associated with expressions of resistance and confusion, questioning context (proportionally more regarding substantive than non-substantive issues), question content (least to disclosure-focused questions), utterance type (more to directives, particularly those posed by defense lawyers; more to recall-based than recognition prompts), and age (children in mid-adolescence were less likely to respond uncertainly than those who were either older or younger). There were no associations between expressions of uncertainty and ground rule administration, or with whether or not the question focused on central rather than peripheral details about the alleged crimes. Findings highlight concerns surrounding preparatory procedures to help witnesses, especially adolescents, indicate uncertainty when testifying. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Investigative Interviewing of Aboriginal Children in Cases of Suspected Sexual Abuse

This study examined the investigative interviewing of Australian Aboriginal children in cases of alleged sexual abuse, with a focus on three commonly included components of interview protocols: ground rules, practice narrative, and substantive phase. Analysis of 70 field transcripts revealed that the overall delivery and practice of ground rules at the beginning of the interview was positively associated with the spontaneous usage of rules in children's narratives of abuse. When specifically examining the "don't know" rule, however, only practice had an effect of children's usage of the rule (as opposed to simple delivery or no delivery at all). Children spoke more words overall, and interviewers used more open-ended prompts during the substantive phase when the interviews contained a practice narrative. Children most often disclosed sexual abuse in response to an open-ended prompt; however, they produced the most words in response to suggestive prompts. This article concludes with a discussion of the effectiveness of ground rules, practice narratives, and questioning with Aboriginal children.