Beliefs About Children’s Memory and Child Investigative Interviewing Practices: A Survey in Dutch Child Protection Professionals from ‘Safe Home’

Abstract

Knowledge of children's memory and forensic interviewing skills are crucial in child abuse investigations. Safe Home is the Dutch hotline where both professionals and citizens can report concerns about child abuse or domestic violence. Professionals at Safe Home often serve as first responders to determine the need for a child abuse investigation, protective measures and/or further police investigation. In this study, child protection professionals (N = 158) employed at Safe Home (i.e., behavioral scientists, medical doctors, and social workers) completed an online survey on beliefs about memory functioning and forensic interviewing. In line with earlier studies, we expected to find a lack of knowledge about memory functioning among Safe Home workers. Furthermore, we expected limited use of forensic interviewing methods that have received empirical support. Indeed, we found many professionals endorsed beliefs not in line with current memory research, especially beliefs about repressed and recovered memories. Still, high percentages of professionals also reported memory beliefs related to false memory formation and suggestion that were in line with scientific evidence. Some professionals reported using interviewing methods for which there is no empirical validation. Because child protection professionals are often the first to interview children about allegations of abuse, the current findings identify a need for training in child forensic interviewing, including knowledge of human memory.

Knowledge about eyewitness testimony: a survey of Indonesian police officers and psychologists

“…This forced choice procedure has been used in previous related work as well (e.g. see Erens et al (2020) using a forced choice method with a Dutch sample).…”

The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma

“…They found that 75.7% ( n = 108) agreed that they could. In a recent study, 84% ( n = 133) of Dutch child-protection workers indicated that traumatic memories are often repressed (Erens, Otgaar, Patihis, & De Ruiter, 2019).…”

“…In addition, because the items used differed to some extent among survey studies, we concentrated on statements for which people were asked specifically about the frequency of repressed memories (e.g., “Traumatic memories are often repressed”). When we focused on these statements (Erens et al, 2019; Kagee & Breet, 2015; Patihis et al, 2014), we found that 78% ( n = 618) of surveyed people believed that traumatic experiences are often repressed. We also compared the rates of belief in repressed memories in the 1990s with those of all studies performed after the 1990s.…”

Police's and victim care officers' beliefs about memory and investigative interviewing with children: Survey findings from Malaysia

“…Participants were asked to indicate whether they thought each statement is ‘true’ or ‘false’, or they could select the ‘don't know’ option. Of the 20 statements, 19 are false based on broad scientific consensus (see Erens et al, 2020; Sumampouw et al, 2020).…”

“…For instance, Quas et al's study (2005) in California showed substantial variability in jury‐eligible students' knowledge about children's memory, suggestibility, and reactions to sexual abuse; some beliefs were compatible with scientific research findings (e.g., children can be suggestible about events they do not understand) while others were not (e.g., children can remember sexual abuse that occurred during infancy). A survey conducted by Erens et al (2020) revealed that many social workers, behavioural scientists, and medical doctors in the Netherlands agreed that repressed memories can be retrieved accurately using certain therapeutic techniques, despite such an argument running counter to current memory research (see Otgaar et al, 2019; see also Dodier & Otgaar, 2019).…”