The relationship between interview characteristics and accuracy of recall in young children: do individual differences matter?

The Effects of Practice on Children's Ability to Apply Ground Rules in a Narrative Interview

Despite the widespread use of ground rules in forensic interview guidelines, it is unknown whether children retain and apply these rules throughout narrative interviews. We evaluated the capacity of 260 five- to nine-year-olds to utilize three ground rules. At the beginning of the interview all children heard the rules; half also practiced them. Children then responded to open-ended prompts about a repeated laboratory event and were assessed for their application of the rules. Logistic regressions revealed that practice only benefitted the use of the "don't know" rule. Although the children accurately answered "don't understand" and "correct me" practice questions, practice appeared to give no greater benefit than just hearing the rules. Results suggest that the current format of ground rule practice in interview guidelines is appropriate for the "don't know" rule, but the other rules may require more extensive practice with this age group.

The veridicality of children's reports of parenting: a review of factors contributing to parent-child discrepancies

Child informants routinely participate in forensic and social service investigations and are often a critical source of information. However, across research domains high levels of discrepancy between parents' reports and children's reports have been documented, which has led researchers to question children's abilities to provide accurate information about others' behavior. To date research examining parent-child discrepancies has focused on discrepancies in reports of child behavior. The aim of the present review is to examine children's abilities to provide veridical accounts of parental behaviors, drawing on developmental and clinical research to delineate factors likely to enhance or impede accuracy. Among the factors examined, age appears to have the strongest influence on the accuracy of children's reports in general. A clear distinction also emerged in the literature between children's abilities to report objective data versus information regarding abstract concepts. Although available evidence provides mixed support for the veridicality of children's reports of parenting, factors that influence children's accuracy have generally been overlooked. Namely, researchers have largely failed to discriminate between assessment of child-rearing behaviors and children's perceptions of those behaviors. The present review proposes that such failure likely accounts for a notable portion of parent-child discrepancies in reports of parenting.

Assessing children's exposure to intimate partner violence

Child exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) is widely acknowledged as a threat to the psycho-social and academic well-being of children. Unfortunately, as reflected in the literature, the specific link between such exposure and childhood outcomes is ambiguous. Based on a review of the literature, this article suggests that this state of affairs is due, in part, to the manner with which exposure to IPV is operationally defined. After reviewing the dominant strategies for operationally defining exposure to IPV and the problems associated with those strategies, this article reports original data contrasting three measures derived from maternal reports, three measures derived from child reports, and the limited concordance among those different indices of exposure to IPV. The implications of these findings for research on child outcomes and the clinical assessment of children who might have been exposed to IPV are discussed.