Dynamics in Using Different Question Types in Estonian Police Interviews of Children

Abstract

The present study examined Estonian police officers' interviewing tactics with children in cases of physical and/or sexual abuse, as there are no published studies conducted in a country formally part of the Soviet Union. Also, the dynamics in using different question types within interviews was examined. Investigative interviews with 66 children (mean age 8 years 10 months, range 4 to 14 years) were transcribed and analyzed. Option-posing and direct questions were most frequently employed, but invitations produced significantly more information. Four to seven-year-old children were asked more suggestive questions than older children. As interviews progressed, the average number of explanations and general invitations per interview decreased, whereas the number of suggestive and option-posing questions increased. This study suggests that like police officers in other countries, Estonian investigators require training in structured interviewing methods to increase the number of invitations and reduce reliance upon option-posing and direct questions.

The Griffiths Question Map: A Forensic Tool For Expert Witnesses’ Assessments of Witnesses and Victims’ Statements

“…Our analysis highlighted how the interview was mainly conducted in an inappropriate manner. The quality of the investigative interview is consistent with previous empirical findings as approximately 70% of the questions asked in the whole interviews as well as in the third phase of the interview (i.e., the questioning) were inappropriate (i.e., closed, multiple, forced choice, opinion, and leading questions) (e.g., see for similar results). Consequently, as adolescents are particularly compliant with judicial authority figures and their suggestibility level can increase when investigators use pressure (e.g., negative feedbacks, opinion or statements, and expression of doubt) to gather information (e.g., ), the 40% of leading questions (e.g., “and then he put his thing in your pussy (sic), right?”) and the 10% opinions expressed by the interviewer (e.g., “I have to understand, that is why I ask you question.…”

“…However, research about young children and adolescents’ interviews in real‐life settings does not paint a positive picture about interviewers’ investigative interview practices. Interviewers ask very few open questions (e.g., ) and mostly use closed , suggestive (e.g., ), direct, and forced choice questions . Specifically with adolescents, the use of suggestive prompts often increases right after the witness or victim develops an answer to an open question (Dodier, Verkampt, Milne, Ginet, & Griffiths, 2015, Personal Communication).…”

Técnicas de entrevista em casos de abuso sexual infantojuvenil: uma revisão sistemática.

“…As pesquisas acerca de métodos de entrevista não estruturados ou cujas técnicas não constam precisamente descritas no procedimento dos artigos, foram desenvolvidas em mais de cinco países, entre eles Austrália, Malásia, Brasil, Estados Unidos, Finlândia, Nova Zelândia, Estônia e Suécia, totalizando 717 entrevistas de investigação de suspeita de abuso sexual infantojuvenil analisadas (Brubacher & La Rooy, 2014;Cederborg, Danielsson, La Rooy, & Lamb, 2009;Cheung, 2008;Fogarty, Augoustinos, & Kettler, 2013;Gilstrap, 2004;Kask, 2012;Korkman, Santtila, & Sandnabba, 2006;Patterson & Pipeb, 2009;Santila, Korkman, & Sandnabba, 2004;Schreiber, 2000;Snow, Powell, & Murfett, 2009;Stracke, 2013;. Tratam-se de dezenove estudos (35% da amostra) que procuraram analisar desde a relação entre tipos de enunciados e a resposta dos entrevistados, até os efeitos da repetição de entrevistas na qualidade e volume de informações prestadas, e o rapport.…”

Küsimuste sõnajärje mõju nähtud isiku mäletamise täpsusele 4- ja 6-aastastel eesti lastel

“…NICHD protokolli kasutades tõusis uurijatel 4-13-aastaste seksuaalselt ärakasutatud laste küsitlemisel avatud küsimuste proportsioon ülekuulamisel tavapäraselt 10-20%-lt 50%-le (Orbach jt 2000). Võrreldes mitte struktureeritud intervjuu kasutamisega meenutati rohkem infot vastuseks avatud küsimustele ja vähem infot sugestiivsetele ja suletud küsimustele (Sternberg jt 2001, Kask 2012.…”

“…Küsides lapstunnistajatelt avatud küsimusi, annavad lapsed sama täpseid tunnistusi kui täiskasvanud (Poole, White 1991). Samas, küsides lapselt suletud (nt kas-küsimused) või suunavaid küsimusi (küsimus millegi kohta, mida laps pole veel maininud), kasvab ebatäpsete detailide hulk lapse vastustes (Kask, Bull 2009, Kask 2012). …”