Search

Self-reported dietary intake is commonly used to inform policy; however, memory-based reports are subject to error. Our aim was to examine dietary reporting errors using a repeated-events framework. Participants (N = 102) completed a 3-day food diary and 10 days later recalled what they had consumed on one self-nominated day and one experimenter-nominated day from the diary period. Self-nominated day reports were more accurate than experimenter-nominated day reports. Across both days, participants made more errors by reporting a food from the wrong day than by reporting foods not recorded in the diary at all. Unexpectedly, participants who completed their food-diary across Sunday-Monday-Tuesday were more accurate than those who completed across Thursday-Friday-Saturday, and participants who completed the study in 2020 were more accurate than those who completed it in 2021/2. Overall, results are consistent with the repeated events literature and outline a new approach to better understand dietary self-reporting.

Witnesses reporting repeated crimes--like family violence--must report detailed information about individual incidents. Previously, recalling generic information about a repeated event before individual episodes has helped children report more information overall. The current study examined whether adults would also benefit from recalling generic event information first. Seventy-eight adults completed four activity sessions and were later interviewed about them. All interviews included a generic phase where participants were prompted to recall what usually happens, and an episodic phase where they recalled two individual episodes of the activities. Participants were randomly assigned to receive the generic (n = 38) or the episodic phase first (n = 40). During the generic phase, the generic-first participants reported more details. However, when reporting the second individual episode, episodic-first participants reported more details. Findings suggest mild benefits from describing generic event information first, but potential detrimental impacts on subsequent episodic reports are discussed.

Witnesses often need to describe individual episodes of repeated crimes, such as family violence. Suggestive questions containing incorrect information reduce the accuracy of adults' reports of single events; in the current experiment, we examined the effects of suggestive questions on adults' reports of one episode of a repeated event. Over two weeks, 134 participants completed four activity sessions containing variable details that changed each session, and new details that were not repeated across the series. One week later, they were interviewed and described one (self-nominated) target episode. Next, participants were asked four suggestive questions that varied according to whether the suggested details had been experienced in a non-target episode or not experienced, and detail-type (variable or new). As research with children indicated that question-type might be important, half our participants were asked open suggestive questions; the other half were asked closed suggestive questions. Participants accepted more suggestions about experienced (non-target) than not-experienced details, and about variable than new details. They also accepted more details in open than closed questions, but only for experienced non-target new details. Our results demonstrate the ease with which participants accepted interviewer-suggested details when reporting on an episode of a repeated event. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The typical misinformation effect shows that accuracy is lower for details about which people received misleading compared to non-misleading (control) information. In two experiments, we examined the misinformation effect for non-witnessed details (i.e., absent). Three question types introduced control, misleading, and absent details (closed, closed-detailed, and open questions) about a mock burglary video. On this misinformation test, participants' reports of absent details were less accurate than control details only when they were introduced using open questions. Misinformation effects in a subsequent recognition test were present for misleading details in both experiments, but for absent details only in Experiment 2. Experiment 2 also revealed that participants who avoided answering open questions containing misleading and absent details had more accurate memories for these details on the subsequent recognition test than participants who answered these questions. In both experiments, confidence was lowest for absent details. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Child witness interviews frequently comprise the central evidence in child sexual assault prosecutions. The aim of the present study was to explore the association between interview quality, interview inconsistencies raised during cross-examination, and trial outcome, while taking into account the strength of the prosecution case. Sixty-nine interviews of child complainants (56 female; aged 6-18 years) were coded for quality (proportion of open-ended questions, interviewer compliance with best-practice, and evidential categories sought). Corresponding trial transcripts were coded for indicators of case strength including number of victims and corroborating evidence (e.g., DNA, eyewitnesses). Cross-examination transcripts were coded for inconsistencies within the child witness interview or between this interview and another statement by the same complainant. After controlling for number of victims and corroborative evidence, interview quality was not associated with trial outcomes. The strongest predictor of verdict was the number of victims: the greater the number of victims, the more likely the defendant was to be convicted of at least one count. The number of inconsistencies was marginally associated with outcome: the greater the number of inconsistencies, the more likely the defendant was to be acquitted. The findings highlight the importance of examining the trial as a whole when investigating the relationship between the child witness interviews and the legal process. Future studies are necessary to replicate these findings, ideally with interviews ranging in quality on key indicators of best-practice interviewing., Author(s): Anne Sophie Pichler [sup.1] , Stefanie J. Sharman [sup.1] , Martine Powell [sup.2] , Nina Westera [sup.2] , Jane Goodman-Delahunty [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.1021.2, 0000 0001 0526 7079, [...]

In many criminal cases, outcomes rely on eyewitness evidence. Exposure to misleading information after an event reduces the accuracy of witnesses' memories. In some circumstances, warnings about misinformation can protect witnesses. As social media is a growing source of misleading information, this study examined the effect of misleading post-event information delivered via a social media-style video, as well as the utility of a minimal versus detailed warning. Participants (N = 145) watched a video showing an electrician stealing items from a client's home. Next, they received one of three pre-warnings regarding forthcoming misleading information: a minimal warning indicating that caution should be taken, a detailed warning specifying the presence of misleading information, or no warning. Participants received the misleading information via a social media video or a standard text-based narrative. Finally, they completed a recognition test. Although delivery method did not affect errors for misleading items, detailed warnings were only effective against text-based misleading information. Participants were more confident about their correct than incorrect responses for misleading items; confidence was not affected by delivery method or warning. This experiment is the first to demonstrate people's susceptibility to misleading post-event information delivered in a social media-style video using an eyewitness paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explored adults' perceptions of evidence-based interview frameworks in the context of sexual assault, in order to examine stakeholders' suggestions that police interviews are not sensitive to complainants psychological and emotional needs. Participants (N= 91) watched a video of an implied sexual assault and were randomly assigned to one of three interview conditions: the cognitive interview (CI), a streamlined interview for vulnerable witnesses (SIM), and the same streamlined interview with narrative practice (SIM+P). After the interview, participants evaluated their perceptions of the interview process and interviewer. Their non-verbal behaviors during the interviews were also compared across interview frameworks. CI participants reported more information than SIM and SIM+P participants, but the reverse was true when interview length was controlled. CI participants perceived the interview as more effortful than SIM participants, but there were no other differences in perceptions or non-verbal behavior. Implications for interviewers are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined whether the cognitive interview (CI) procedure increased event recall in children with severe intellectual disabilities (ID) compared with children with no ID. Forty-six children with and without ID watched a videotaped event; they were aged between eight and 11 years. The next day they were individually interviewed using the CI or a structured interview (SI). Interviews consisted of free recall and specific questions, some of which contained leading or misleading information. The leading and misleading questions determined children's susceptibility to information presented after the event. Overall, children without ID reported more correct information than children with ID. For all children, the CI led to more correct recall than the SI without increases in incorrect details or confabulations. Although the CI did not decrease children's susceptibility to the misleading questions compared with the SI, children without ID disagreed with more of the misleading suggestions than children with ID. These results suggest that the CI may indeed be a valuable tool to elicit information from very vulnerable witnesses. (Contains 1 note and 3 tables.)

We examined whether the cognitive interview (CI) procedure enhanced the coherence of narrative accounts provided by children with and without intellectual disabilities (ID), matched on chronological age. Children watched a videotaped magic show; one day later, they were interviewed using the CI or a structured interview (SI). Children interviewed using the CI reported more correct details than those interviewed using the SI. Additionally, children interviewed using the CI reported more contextual background details, more logically ordered sequences, more temporal markers, and fewer inconsistencies in their stories than those interviewed using the SI. However, the CI did not increase the number of story grammar elements compared with the SI. Overall children interviewed with the CI told better stories than those interviewed with the SI. This finding provided further support for the effectiveness of the CI with vulnerable witnesses, particularly children with ID. (Contains 2 notes and 2 tables.)

For crimes such as child abuse and family violence, jurors' assessments of memory reports from key witnesses are vital to case outcomes in court. Since jurors are not experts on memory, the present research measured laypeople's (i.e., non-experts') beliefs about how three key factors affect witnesses' memory reports for an experienced event: how frequently an event was experienced (repeated, single), the delay between experiencing and reporting the event, and the emotional valence of the event. Across two studies, lay participants completed an online survey that measured their beliefs about each factor. In Study 1, 51 participants completed a survey about how the three factors affect children's memory. In Study 2, another 51 participants completed a survey about how the three factors affect adult's memory. Across both studies, delays were believed to worsen memory, and emotion was believed to improve memory. Beliefs about single and repeated events showed different patterns across the studies. In Study 1, participants' beliefs about children's memory for repeated experience were variable. In Study 2, participants believed that adults' memory was worse for repeated events than single events. Overall, laypeople demonstrated many accurate beliefs about memory, but showed some confusion about children's memory for repeated events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To examine the effects of exposure to complex autobiographical events on imagination inflation, subjects performed a 3-stage procedure. First, they rated their confidence that a list of events had happened in their childhood. Second, subjects imagined and paraphrased complex fictitious events 0, 1, 3, or 5 times. Finally, they rated their confidence for the childhood events a second time. We found that subjects became more confident that the fictitious events really did happen in childhood, regardless of whether they were imagined or paraphrased. There was no repetition effect beyond that of a single exposure. Taken together with the results of other research, our data suggest that the greater processing fluency associated with the target events drives imagination inflation.