Children's memory for medical emergencies: 2 years later.

Abstract

Long-term recall of medical emergencies (including both injury and hospital treatment) by 2- to 13-year-olds was assessed 2 years after injury. Event identity was important: Children recalled injury details better than hospital treatment. Ninety-six children were interviewed 3 times prior to the 2-year recall; amount recalled decreased only for hospital treatment details, although accuracy of recall decreased for both injury and treatment. Twenty-one children were interviewed only twice prior to the 2-year interview. An extra interview 1 year after their injury had little effect on how much older children recalled about both injury and treatment or how much younger children recalled about injury details, but it helped younger children recall the less memorable hospital event. The extra interview also helped all children maintain accuracy when recalling hospital details but was unnecessary for the more memorable injury event. Implications for children's testimony are discussed.

The influence of an early interview on long‐term recall: a comparative analysis

“…Such a design pemrits the ethical and systematic study of unanticipated, naturally occurring stressful events that mimics those events that would most likely be processed through the criminal justice system. The results of the Peterson studies (1996;1999;Peterson & Bell, 1996;Peterson & Whalen, 2001) address an important and forensically relevant question: Do long retention delays have differential memory effects depending on the ages of children? More specifically, her results challenge the validity of the legal professional's long standing belief that long delays between incident and questioning heightens forgetting by young children (Flin, Boon, Knox, & Bull, 1992).…”

“…Considerable research has investigated children's long-term memory and most studies have shown encouraging results with respect to children's accuracy (Peterson, 1999;Poole & White, 1993;Quas et al, 1999). More specifically, children's memory is quite accurate even when assessed a year following the traumatic event (Burgwyn-Bailes Influence of an Early Interview 2 et al, Peterson, Moores & White, 2001).…”

“…Peterson (1999) examined memory of children in a wider age range (2-13 years old) and found little difference between 5-and 13-year-olds. The 3-and 4-year olds had significantly less recall compared to the 5-year-olds and the 2-year-olds remembered less than the 3-and 4-year-olds.…”

“…Ironically, studies have shown that the average levels of stress experienced by children in most of the studies (except those on VCUGs- Goodman et al, 1994;Merritt et al, 1994) were not high. All these taken together can conceivably influence and direct a child's recalL Peterson (Peterson, 1996(Peterson, , 1999Peterson & Bell, 1996;Peterson & Whalen, 2001) tries to provide a bridge between controlled, systematic investigation and ethical research of memory for traumatic occurrences by interviewing children shortly after they experience a minor injury. Using this procedure, children's amount and accuracy of recall of unforeseen stressful injuries over short and long-term delays can be determined.…”

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

“…Moreover, repeated demands for a child to retrieve information from memory may increase confabulations due to social pressure. Despite these concerns, studies of children's memory for experienced events generally suggest that repeated interviews can improve performance by facilitating recall and reducing forgetting (e.g., Howe, Courage, & Bryant-Brown, 1993;Peterson, 1999). Yet, in a second line of research, specifically when children are suggestively questioned about false events, adverse effects of repeated interviews appear to emerge (e.g., Bruck, Ceci, & Hembrooke, 2002;Leichtman & Ceci, 1995).…”