Collaborative Research: The Impact of Disclosure History and Interviewing Protocol on Children's Eyewitness Testimony

目前，对于哪种采访技术能够从据称遭受儿童身体虐待和性虐待的受害者那里提供最可靠的证据，还没有达成共识。一种采访方式反映了数十年来对儿童目击者证词的研究，鼓励儿童用自己的话描述事件，避免具体的问题和道具。相比之下，另一种风格寻求通过使用身体图和关于触摸的具体问题来最大限度地披露信息。不幸的是，关于哪种方法最能区分受虐儿童和未受虐儿童的争论，以及儿童目击证词本身的研究领域，都陷入了僵局。这项研究项目使用了一种新的方法，使研究人员能够在实验室环境中安全、合乎道德地在这两种不同的方法之间进行测试。结果将决定目击者的发现是否会因不同披露历史的儿童而有所不同，以及在访谈中身体图的定位是否会影响真实和虚假报告的比率。关于最佳面谈做法的信息有可能影响执法官员使用的州和国家级面谈政策。

Currently, there is no consensus on which interviewing techniques provide the most reliable evidence from alleged victims of child physical and sexual abuse. One style of interviewing, which reflects decades of research on children's eyewitness testimony, encourages children to describe events in their own words and avoids specific questions and props. In contrast, another style seeks to maximize disclosures through the use of body diagrams and specific questions about touching. Unfortunately, the debate over which method best distinguishes abused from nonabused children, and the field of children's eyewitness testimony itself, are at an impasse. This research project uses a new approach that allows researchers to safely and ethically test between these two different approaches in a laboratory setting. Results will determine whether eyewitness findings vary for children with different disclosure histories and whether the positioning of body diagrams in interviews influences rates of true and false reports. Information about optimal interviewing practices has the potential to influence state and national-level interviewing policies utilized by law enforcement officials.