Detecting deception in children's testimony: factfinders' abilities to reach the truth in open court and closed-circuit trials
- PMID: 11501438
- DOI: 10.1023/a:1010603618330
Detecting deception in children's testimony: factfinders' abilities to reach the truth in open court and closed-circuit trials
Abstract
This study examined the influence of closed-circuit television (CCTV) on jurors' abilities to detect deception in children's testimony. Children ages 7-9 individually played games and made a video movie with a male confederate. In the guilty condition, stickers were placed on exposed body parts (i.e., the child's arm, toes, and bellybutton). In the not-guilty and deception conditions, stickers were placed on the child's clothing rather than on bare skin. Approximately 3 weeks later, mock jurors recruited from the community viewed child participants testify either in a traditional courtroom setting or via one-way CCTV. The mock jurors responded to questions about the child witness and the defendant as well as deliberated to reach a verdict. Children in the deception condition were asked to testify as if the stickers had been placed on exposed body parts rather than on their clothing. Predeliberation, jurors were less likely to convict when a child testified in the deception condition as opposed to the guilty condition. These differences disappeared following deliberation. There was no support for the notion that jurors reach the truth better when children testify in open court versus via CCTV. Implications for jurors' abilities to reach the truth are discussed.
Similar articles
-
Face-to-face confrontation: effects of closed-circuit technology on children's eyewitness testimony and jurors' decisions.Law Hum Behav. 1998 Apr;22(2):165-203. doi: 10.1023/a:1025742119977. Law Hum Behav. 1998. PMID: 9566121 Clinical Trial.
-
Hearsay versus children's testimony: Effects of truthful and deceptive statements on jurors' decisions.Law Hum Behav. 2006 Jun;30(3):363-401. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9009-0. Law Hum Behav. 2006. PMID: 16779675
-
Attorney Questions Predict Jury-eligible Adult Assessments of Attorneys, Child Witnesses, and Defendant Guilt.Behav Sci Law. 2016 Jan;34(1):178-99. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2214. Epub 2016 Mar 2. Behav Sci Law. 2016. PMID: 26932420 Free PMC article.
-
Children on the stand: the obligation to speak the truth.J Dev Behav Pediatr. 1991 Apr;12(2):121-8. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 1991. PMID: 2045485 Review.
-
Questions and deception: How to ask better questions and elicit the truth.Curr Opin Psychol. 2022 Oct;47:101383. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101383. Epub 2022 Jun 9. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35779451 Review.
Cited by
-
Adults' judgments of children's coached reports.Law Hum Behav. 2006 Oct;30(5):561-70. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9038-8. Law Hum Behav. 2006. PMID: 16941237 Free PMC article.
-
"That never happened": adults' discernment of children's true and false memory reports.Law Hum Behav. 2012 Oct;36(5):365-74. doi: 10.1037/h0093920. Epub 2011 Nov 21. Law Hum Behav. 2012. PMID: 23030818 Free PMC article.
-
How Children Report True and Fabricated Stressful and Non-Stressful Events.Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2013 Nov 1;20(6):867-881. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2012.750896. Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2013. PMID: 24659903 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of the putative confession instruction on perceptions of children's true and false statements.Appl Cogn Psychol. 2019 Jul-Aug;33(4):655-661. doi: 10.1002/acp.3483. Epub 2018 Oct 22. Appl Cogn Psychol. 2019. PMID: 33574640 Free PMC article.
-
The Effects of Repetition on Children's True and False Reports.Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2012 Aug 1;19(4):10.1080/13218719.2011.615808. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2011.615808. Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2012. PMID: 24265592 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources