The Effects of Attorney Questioning Strategies on Perceptions of Victim Credibility in Hypothetical CSA Cases

• In Event: Sources of Sentencing Disparities in Various Court Settings and Case Types

Abstract

Background: Establishing victim credibility in child sexual abuse (CSA) trials is essential, as children’s testimony is the most important piece of evidence prosecutors present. Research shows that defense attorneys’ questioning highlights common misconceptions about CSA (e.g., the use of force and the child’s resistance; the presence of witnesses). Other questioning tactics examined in prior research include highlighting inconsistencies and asking about coaching. In the current study, we assess the effects of these questioning strategies on mock jurors’ assessments of victim credibility. Method: We administered a randomized vignette survey (varying child gender and age) to a representative sample of US adults (n = 350) recruited via Prolific Academic. We assessed how each segment of testimony influenced several dimensions of child credibility—plausibility, consistency, honesty/suggestive influences—and guilty verdicts. We also assessed how child age and gender influenced overall credibility assessments and verdicts, controlling for respondents’ endorsement of CSA myths. Results: Credibility assessments and verdicts varied, depending on the topic of questioning presented, and some topics influenced perceptions/verdicts more than others. Implications: Attorneys’ questioning strategies matter for case outcomes. Defense attorneys can maximize credibility attacks, and prosecutors can mitigate credibility concerns, by focusing on specific topics shown to influence jury assessments.

Authors

• Suzanne St. George, University of Arkansas at Little Rock

• Katelin Matusevich, University of Arkansas at Little Rock

• Stacia Stolzenberg, Arizona State University

• Emily Denne, Arizona State University