Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän

Is a friendly interview a… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Is a friendly interview always a friendly one?

Konferensbidrag (offentliggjort, men ej förlagsutgivet)
Författare Annika Melinder
Mikaela Magnusson
Livia L Gilstrap
Publicerad i 19th European Conference on Developmental Psychology in Athens, Greece (29/8 - 1/9 -19)
Publiceringsår 2019
Publicerad vid Psykologiska institutionen
Språk en
Ämnesord barnförhör
Ämneskategorier Tillämpad psykologi


Background and Aims: Researchers have over the past decades recognized a need to develop more suitable forensic interview protocols to meet younger children’s need for improved and adapted communication, at times with mixed success. This study examines to what extent a child friendly protocol that includes communication aids (e.g., emotional cards, pictures, and drawings) conducted by highly educated police investigators, helps children to report more detailed information from a criminal allegation. In addition, we investigated the dynamics between interviewees and interviewers. We predicted that children’s spontaneous recollection would elicit more open-ended and focused follow-up questions from interviewers, and increase the likelihood of posing more open questions. We expected wh-questions to produce more central details regarding the abuse, and support the interviewers to resist suggestive and leading questioning. Method: Transcripts from 33 children (18 girls, M = 9.42, SD = 3.85), who underwent a forensic evaluation regarding abuse, were coded and analyzed for interviewer type of questions and children’s responses. For the analyses of the dynamics between child and interviewer, we employed sequential analyses to predict behaviour from child to interviewer, and from interviewer to child. Results: Data confirm an enriched communication after open-ended questions compared to suggestive and closed questions in terms of mean transitional probability. Specifically, the children reported more detailed central information regarding the abuse after cued recall and wh-questions (ps < .001), and interviewers followed up with more facilitators when children reported details (ps < .001). When the child was reluctant (e.g., said no) or a brief yes, interviewers produced more suggestive questions but fewer off topic comments about the interview situation (ps < .01). Conclusions: Younger children need more communicative aids than what traditional interview protocols provide. The present study shows that children’s report do not necessarily suffer from the use of non-verbal material. If communicative aids are used together with suggestive questioning however, then the interview is not a friendly one any longer.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?