Preschoolers’ true and false reports: Comparing effects of the Sequential Interview and NICHD protocol

Abstract

Purpose. The current study aimed to examine a Norwegian technique for conducting investigative interviews with preschoolers: the Sequential Interview (SI). The SI advocates for increased initial rapport building and includes a predetermined break before the substantive phase. To explore the potential benefits and risks of the SI, the technique was compared with an adapted version of the National Institute of Child Health and Development (NICHD) protocol. Methods. A total of 129 preschoolers (3-6 years) were interviewed with either the SI or NICHD protocol about a self-experienced (Exp. I) or non-experienced (Exp. II) event. Result. For Exp. I, no significant difference was observed across interview conditions in the number of reported details about a self-experienced event. Children interviewed with the SI exhibited a slightly lower accuracy rate compared to those interviewed with the NICHD protocol. For Exp. II, a total of 31.1% of the preschoolers initially assented to remembering a fictive (false) experience and 15.6% gave an account (>40 details) of the non-experienced event. We found no difference between interviewing conditions in assent rates or number of false accounts. Conclusions. The study provides valuable insights into the difficulties involved when interviewing young children. The results showed few differences between the novel SI model and the well-established NICHD protocol. While many preschoolers could provide accurate testimony, some embedded worrisome false details in their narratives. Furthermore, a minority of children gave false reports about non-experienced events when interviewed with the two techniques. Methodological limitations and suggestions for future research will be discussed.

The effects of drawing on preschoolers' statements about experienced and non‐experienced events

“…Of the 25 children, four started to provide details about a pirate in response to the introductory questions before the drawing material was introduced. Their false narratives are beyond the scope of the present study and will therefore not be discussed further (see Magnusson, Joleby, et al, 2020). Of the remaining 21 children, 13 (61.9%) complied with the drawing request.…”

“…Specifically, children assigned to the shorter verbal rapport building condition (based on the NICHD protocol) provided more details compared to children assigned to a longer prop‐assisted rapport building condition (based on the Sequential Interview model). This finding is likely to derive from fatigue effects, which is a common problem during interviews with preschool‐aged children (for more information, see Magnusson et al, 2020). Moreover, the children's word comprehension was not established beforehand (e.g., if the children understood the difference between a striped and dotted shirt).…”

“…The interview guide contained six phases (see Figure 1); introduction , explanation of ground rules (including to not guess, saying I don't know, and correcting the interviewer if he or she made a mistake 2 ), rapport building (the children were randomly assigned to a shorter verbal rapport or a longer prop‐based rapport), short break (either before or after the initial questioning), questions about Pia the Pirate , and lastly questions about Malin the Sailor , during which phase the children were randomly assigned to draw‐and‐talk or verbal questioning. The first five phases of the interviews formed the basis for a separate study examining pre‐substantive interviewing structures (the NICHD protocol vs. the Sequential Interview Model) and will therefore not be discussed in detail (for more information, see Magnusson et al, 2020). In brief, the NICHD protocol condition included a shorter verbal rapport building session comprising open‐ended questions about the children's interests and an episodic narrative practice phase about a second staged event.…”

Portraits in straw: A reply to Melinder et al. (2020)

“…First, the SI model is built around the assumption that it is beneficial to have multiple breaks when interviewing preschoolers; this may be true but there is no empirical evidence to support it. A recent experimental study, co‐authored by two of our critics, compared an “adapted” version of the NICHD protocol with the Norwegian SI model, introducing a single break in the latter condition, and found no advantage of the SI strategy (Magnusson et al, 2020). 1 In fact, only one study, our own, has investigated the effectiveness of adopting the SI model; the effectiveness of multiple breaks remains unexplored.…”