No abstract

This study examined whether the implementation of Section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act (1999) improved lawyers' questioning strategies when examining child witnesses in England. The government's Section 28 pilot study involved judges holding Ground Rules Hearings, during which restrictions and limitations were placed on the duration, content, and manner of questions to be asked.Afterwards, children's cross-examinations were pre-recorded and later played as part of their evidence at trial. The current study compared cases involving 6-to 15-yearold alleged victims of sexual abuse in which Section 28 was (n = 43) and was not (n = 44) implemented. Defence lawyers in Section 28 cases asked significantly fewer suggestive questions and more option-posing questions than defence lawyers in Nonsection 28 cases. Younger children complied more with defence lawyers' suggestive questions. Ground Rules Hearings improved lawyers' questioning strategies, regardless of the case's involvement in the Section 28 pilot study.

Forensic interviewers are routinely advised to instruct children that they should indicate when they do not understand a question. This study examined whether administering the instruction with a practice question may help interviewers identify the means by which individual children signal incomprehension. We examined 446 interviews with children questioned about abuse, including 252 interviews in which interviewers administered the instruction with a practice question (4- to 13-year-old children; M age = 7.7). Older children more often explicitly referred to incomprehension when answering the practice question and throughout the interviews, whereas younger children simply requested repetition or gave “don’t know” responses, and individual children’s responses to the practice questions predicted their responses later in the interviews. Similarly, older children were more likely to seek confirmation of their understanding of interviewers’ questions and to request specification. The results highlight the need for interviewers to test and closely monitor younger children’s responses for ambiguous signs of incomprehension.

Forensic interviewers are taught to pair yes–no questions with open-ended requests for recall in order to reduce the likelihood that they will be misled by false “yes” responses. However, yes–no questions may elicit false “no” responses. Questioning 112 6- to 11-year-old maltreated children about three innocuous events (outside activities, yesterday, last birthday), this study compared the productivity of paired yes–no questions about perceptions, conversations, and actions involving the hands and mouth (e.g., “Did you say anything?”) with wh-questions (e.g., “What did you say?”). The wh-questions presupposed that children had content to provide, but did not specify that content. Children were twice as likely to deny content and half as likely to provide novel information when interviewers asked them yes–no questions. Younger children were more inclined than older children to deny content and give unelaborated “yes” responses. The results support further research into the potential for suppositional wh-questions to increase child witnesses’ productivity.