Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law and Psychology

Selected Works

Selected Works

Child interviewing

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

44. The Effects Of Question Repetition On Responses When Prosecutors And Defense Attorneys Question Children Alleging Sexual Abuse In Court, Samantha J. Andrews, Michael E. Lamb, Thomas D. Lyon Aug 2015

44. The Effects Of Question Repetition On Responses When Prosecutors And Defense Attorneys Question Children Alleging Sexual Abuse In Court, Samantha J. Andrews, Michael E. Lamb, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

This study examined the effects of repeated questions (n=12,169) on 6- to 12-year-olds’ testimony in child sexual abuse cases. We examined transcripts of direct- and cross-examinations of 120 children, categorizing how attorneys asked repeated questions in-court and how children responded. Defense attorneys repeated more questions (33.6% of total questions asked) than prosecutors (17.8%) and repeated questions using more suggestive prompts (38% of their repeated questions) than prosecutors (15%). In response, children typically repeated or elaborated on their answers and seldom contradicted themselves. Self-contradictions were most often elicited by suggestive and option-posing prompts posed by either type of attorney. Child age …


10. Ohio V. Clark: Brief Of Amicus Curiae American Professional Society On The Abuse Of Children In Support Of Petitioner., Jeremy A. Lawrence, Daniel B. Levin, Kevin L. Brady, Maria Jhai, Thomas D. Lyon Jul 2015

10. Ohio V. Clark: Brief Of Amicus Curiae American Professional Society On The Abuse Of Children In Support Of Petitioner., Jeremy A. Lawrence, Daniel B. Levin, Kevin L. Brady, Maria Jhai, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

“Testimonial” statements are inadmissible against criminal defendants under the Confrontation Clause unless the declarant was subject to cross-examination. Statements are testimonial if the primary purpose of the speaker and the interrogator was to create an out-of-court substitute for trial testimony. Ohio v. Clark (2015) considered whether a 3-year-old’s disclosure of abuse to his teacher is testimonial. This brief surveyed case law, statutory law, and psychological and criminological research in arguing that it is not. First, young children do not appreciate that their disclosures may be used at trial, because they do not fully understand the legal system. Furthermore, many children …


42. Repeated Self And Peer-Review Leads To Continuous Improvement In Child Interviewing, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Thomas D. Lyon Jun 2015

42. Repeated Self And Peer-Review Leads To Continuous Improvement In Child Interviewing, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

The present study examined whether a training model that focuses on consistent exposure to protocol procedure, self-evaluation, and intensive peer-review sessions could improve interviewers’ ability to adhere to best practices. Law students (N = 19) interviewed 5- to 10-year-old children on a weekly basis as part of a semester-long forensic child interviewing class. They transcribed their interviews, and participated in one-hour self and peer-reviews. The proportion of each question type was calculated (option-posing, Wh-, and open-invitations) within each interview for each interviewer. Across ten weeks of interviews, interviewers consistently improved their performance, decreasing the proportion of option-posing questions by 31% …


29. Young Children’S Understanding That Promising Guarantees Performance: The Effects Of Age And Maltreatment., Thomas D. Lyon, Angela D. Evans Jul 2013

29. Young Children’S Understanding That Promising Guarantees Performance: The Effects Of Age And Maltreatment., Thomas D. Lyon, Angela D. Evans

Thomas D. Lyon

Two studies, with 102 nonmaltreated 3- to 6-year-old children and 96 maltreated 4- to 7-year-old children, examined children’s understanding of the relative strengths of “I promise,” “I will,” “I might,” and “I won’t,” to determine the most age-appropriate means of eliciting a promise to tell the truth from child witnesses. Children played a game in which they chose which of 2 boxes would contain a toy after hearing story characters make conflicting statements about their intent to place a toy in each box (e.g., one character said “I will put a toy in my box” and the other character said …