The issue before the New Jersey Supreme Court in the Frye hearing New Jersey v. J.L.G. (2018) was whether the scientific community agreed that Summit's (1983) Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome rested on a firm scientific foundation. Lyon et al. (this issue) critique our approach to describing child sexual abuse disclosure, which involved extrapolating rates from children who came to the attention of authorities. Lyon et al. claim that our conclu

No abstract

Humans and animals share a unique bond. Professionals are capitalizing on the human–animal bond by incorporating animals into therapy, forensic interviews, and the courtroom. However, the mnemonic consequence for including dogs in forensic interviews has not been empirically evaluated. In the current study, we examined whether the use of dogs increases the quantity of verbal reports for emotional events. Undergraduate participants were randomly assigned to dog or no dog conditions. Participants were interviewed about positive experienced events and negative experienced events. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for quantity of new information. Participants shared more new information in negative event reports with a dog present than with no dog present. There were no significant differences in the quantity of information disclosed for positive event memories between dog conditions. Canine-assisted interviews may provide comfort to people, resulting in more elaborative autobiographical reports about negative stressful events.

No abstract

Child sexual abuse (CSA) claims brought forward weeks, months, or years after the alleged events are commonplace, yet the trial-level ramifications of delayed disclosure remain unclear. In the present study, we investigated the influence of length of delayed disclosure (1 day, 1 month, 10 months) as a function of the victim-perpetrator relationship (next-door neighbor, stepfather) on mock jurors’ perceptions of a CSA case. Jury-eligible participants (N = 328) read a mock trial summary describing an alleged incident of CSA between an adult male defendant and a seven-year-old female victim. Participants then rendered various case judgments. When length of delay was 10 months versus 1 day, mock jurors rendered fewer guilty verdicts and lower ratings of victim trustworthiness, believability, memory strength, and memory accuracy. Effects of length of delay varied as a function of the victim-perpetrator relationship, but only when the perpetrator was the victim’s next-door neighbor versus stepfather. When the perpetrator was the victim’s next-door neighbor, participants rated the likelihood of abuse as higher and the victim’s memory as stronger with shorter versus longer lengths of delay. Delay did not vary as a function of the victim-perpetrator relationship when the perpetrator was the victim’s stepfather. Findings have implications for trial-level safeguards (e.g., expert testimony) in CSA cases involving delayed disclosure.

Sexual and gender minority youth are at high risk of maltreatment and subsequent criminal justice system involvement, yet jurors' perceptions of these individuals have yet to be investigated. In the current research, we examined mock jurors' decisions after reading a case summary manipulating victim gender (boy, girl), gender identity (cisgender, transgender), and sexual orientation (straight, gay). Jury-eligible community member participants (N = 368) read a case summary describing an alleged incident of child sexual abuse between a male teacher and an adolescent victim then rendered various case judgments. Mock jurors rendered more proprosecution case judgments when the victim was cisgender versus transgender. When the victim was cisgender versus transgender, mock jurors were more likely to convict, rated the defendant less credible, and rated the victim more credible. Effects of victim gender identity varied as a function of gender, but only when the victim was transgender. When the victim was a transgender boy versus girl, jurors were more likely to convict, rendered higher ratings of defendant degree of guilt, rated the defendant less credible, and rated the victim more credible. Findings have implications for jury instructions and voir dire processes when gender minority individuals encounter the justice system. Public Significance StatementFindings reveal novel evidence that antitransgender courtroom biases arise in the context of child maltreatment and peak when the victim is a transgender girl. The prevalence of those who identity as gender minority individuals has proliferated in recent years, demonstrating the need for further research investigating legal perceptions of this population.