Age, Ground Rule Performance, and Ground Rule Application in Interviews with Children

• In Event: Poster Session 01
  In Poster Session: PS 01 Topic - Attention, Learning, Memory

Abstract

Interview ground rules are designed to help child witnesses navigate an investigative interview. These rules typically inform children that they can say “I don’t know,” ask for clarification, or correct the interviewer. They are intended to promote children’s accuracy and comfort by providing them with language to advocate for themselves, allowing them to practice applying the rules at an interview’s outset. Despite their widespread use, little is known about how children perform on these practice questions and how this performance may affect their ground rule application in the substantive interview phase. The current study investigated the effects of children’s age and ground rule practice question performance on their ground rule application in response to difficult and simple interview questions.

122 4- to 9-years-old (M = 6.42, SD = 1.66) engaged in a staged demonstration. Next, children were introduced to the interview ground rules (i.e., tell the truth; say “I don’t know” rather than guessing; say “I don’t understand” as necessary; and correct the interviewer as necessary). Consistent with the NICHD best-practice guidelines, children practiced applying all rules (5 questions, see Table 1) except the “I don’t understand” rule, and their practice was later coded as passing or failing. Children were then asked 22 questions (8 difficult, 14 simple; see Table 2). The difficult questions were vague, intentionally unclear, contained fictitious words, or contained complex syntax.

Children demonstrated understanding of the I Don’t Know (76.2%, n = 93) and Correct the Interviewer (78.7%, n = 96) rules at similar rates. Six 3 (Age: 4-5 v. 6-7 v. 8-9) x 2 (Ground Rule Performance: passed all v. did not pass all) ANOVAs examined the total number of children’s ground rule applications (e.g., “I don’t understand,” “I don’t know”) in response to difficult and simple questions. Regarding “I don’t understand” responses to difficult questions, results revealed main effects of Age, F (2, 116) = 29.62, p < .001, µ2 = .34, and Ground Rule Performance, F (1, 116) = 4.17, p = .044, µ2 = .04; 4- to 5-year-olds and children that did not pass all of the ground rules were significantly less likely to say “I don’t understand” to difficult questions. Regarding “I don’t know” responses to difficult questions, results revealed a main effect of Age, F (2, 116) = 3.387, p = .037, µ2 = .06; 4- to 5-year-olds were significantly more likely to say “I don’t know” than older children. For simple questions, no significant differences emerged for “I don’t understand,” “I don’t know,” or correct the interviewer responses. Finally, no significant differences emerged for correct the interviewer responses to difficult questions.

Ground rules are a key way to prepare children for investigative interviews. These preliminary results demonstrate that ground rule application is variable with key contributing factors being age and practice question performance. Additional analyses will focus on specific ground rule performance in relation to specific ground rule application. Results provide insight into children’s metacognitive abilities and have implications for those who question children across contexts (e.g., forensic, research).

Authors

• Lillian A Rodriguez Steen, The College of Saint Rose
  Presenting Author

• Lindsay C Malloy, University of Ontario Institute of Technology
  Non-Presenting Author

• Daniella Filoso, University of Ontario Institute of Technology
  Non-Presenting Author