Use of Reminders to Facilitate Children’s Clarification Requests in Interviews

• In Event: Improving Eyewitness Reporting: Novel Approaches Across Development

Abstract

When children are questioned about forensically-relevant events, accuracy and clarity are paramount. If misunderstandings occur during an interview, it is crucial that children request clarification to resolve such issues. This requires children to apply the commonly introduced “I don’t understand” ground rule. The current research tested a novel method for increasing children’s appropriate clarification requests in an interview setting.

Children (n = 81, 6-11 years-old) were randomly assigned to an “I Don’t Understand” Reminder Condition (No Reminder vs. Two Reminders) during an interview about a health and safety video. All children received best-practice interview ground rule instructions at the beginning of the interview which included being told that they could say “I don’t understand” if they did not understand an interviewer’s question. “I don’t understand” rule reminders were provided at designated interview points for those in the Reminder Condition and were not contingent upon children’s responses to interview questions. Interviewers asked scripted questions (n = 22), some of which were “simple” (n = 14) and some of which were “tricky” and required clarification (n = 8). Proportion scores were calculated for children’s clarification requests to simple and tricky questions.

With respect to tricky questions, a linear regression examining the total proportion of clarification requests made to tricky questions and testing the effects of Age and Reminder Condition was significant, F (2, 78) = 6.525, p = .002, R² of .143. Both Age and Reminder Condition were significant predictors of children’s proportion of clarification requests made to tricky questions. The total proportion of clarification requests made in response to tricky questions increased .231 (p = .030) between age groups. 9- to 11-year-olds had significantly higher proportion scores here (M = 64.7%, SD = 17.7%) than 6- to 8-year-olds (M = 54.5%, SD = 25.4%). The total proportion of clarifications made in response to tricky questions increased .303 (p = .005) between condition groups. Children in the Reminder Condition had significantly higher proportion scores in response to tricky questions (M = 66.2%, SD = 20.6%) than those in the No Reminder Condition (M = 52.8%, SD = 22.4%). A linear regression also examined the proportion of clarification requests made to simple questions with regards to Age and Reminder Condition, but this analysis was not significant, F (2, 78) = 1.397, p = .254, R² of .035. Neither Age nor Reminder Condition were significant predictors of children’s proportion of clarification requests made to simple questions.

Results of the current research indicate that even if children recognize when they need clarification to answer an interview question, they may forget that asking for clarification to express miscomprehension and confusion is an option for them during interviews that do not contain reminders of the ground rules. The brief reminder intervention tested here successfully increased children’s appropriate clarification requests in response to tricky questions specifically, and did not simply increase clarification requests overall. Children’s ability to request clarification provides insight into children’s metacognitive abilities and has implications for those who question children across contexts (e.g., forensic, research).

Authors

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

• Paulyn Mandap

• Marta Figueiredo Neves

• Erin T. Mattes, Ontario Tech University

• Claudia McArthur

• Sydney D. Spyksma, Ontario Tech University

• Lindsay C Malloy, University of Ontario Institute of Technology