Publications
See below for some featured publications that have come out of CITL!
Spatial Language, Question Type, and Young Children's Ability to Describe Clothing: Legal and Developmental Implications
Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Kelly McWilliams, & Thomas D. Lyon
Children’s descriptions of clothing placement and touching with respect to clothing are central to assessing child sexual abuse allegations. This study examined children’s ability to answer the types of questions attorneys and interviewers typically ask about clothing, using the most common spatial terms (on/off, outside/inside, over/under). Ninety-seven 3- to 6-year-olds were asked yes/no (e.g. “Is the shirt on?”), forced-choice (e.g., “Is the shirt on or off?”), open-choice (e.g., “Is the shirt on or off or something else?”), or where questions (e.g., “Where is the shirt?”) about clothing using a human figurine, clothing, and stickers. Across question types, children generally did well with simple clothing or sticker placement (e.g. pants completely on), except for yes/no questions about “over,” suggesting children had an underinclusive understanding of the word. When clothing or sticker placement was intermediate (e.g., pants around ankles, and therefore neither completely on nor off), children performed poorly except when asked where questions. A similar task using only stickers and boxes, analogous to forensic interviewers’ assessments of children’s understanding, was only weakly predictive of children’s ability to describe clothing. The results suggest that common methods of questioning young children about clothing may lead to substantial misinterpretation.
Ask Versus Tell: Potential Confusion When Child Witness are Questioned About Conversations
Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Kelly McWilliams, & Thomas D. Lyon
Children’s potential confusion between “ask” and “tell” can lead to misunderstandings when child witnesses are asked to report prior conversations. The verbs distinguish both between interrogating and informing and between requesting and commanding. Children’s understanding was examined using both field (Study 1) and laboratory methods (Studies 2–4). Study 1 examined 100 5- to 12-year-olds’ trial testimony in child sexual abuse cases, and found that potentially ambiguous use of ask and tell was common, typically found in yes/no questions that elicited unelaborated answers, and virtually never clarified by attorneys or child witnesses. Studies 2–4 examined 345 maltreated 6- to 11-year-olds’ understanding of ask and tell. The results suggest that children initially comprehend telling as saying, and thus believe that asking is a form of telling. As such, they often endorsed asking as telling when asked/yes no questions, but distinguished between asking and telling when explicitly asked to choose. Their performance was impaired by movement between different use of the words. Child witnesses’ characterization of their conversations can easily be misconstrued by the way in which they are questioned, leading questioners to misinterpret whether they were coached by disclosure recipients or coerced by abuse suspects.
Questioning Kids: Applying the Lessons from Developmentally-Sensitive Investigative Interviewing to the Research Context
Lindsay C. Malloy & Stacia N. Stolzenberg
In 1989, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child solidified that “the child who is capable of forming his or her own views [has] the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child.” Involving children as research participants is one key method of ensuring that children’s voices are heard, especially in psychological science where researchers gather information from children across clinical, developmental, health, cognitive, and social research contexts and in related fields like psychiatry, social work, nursing, and medicine. How we talk to children as researchers affects whether we produce rigorous science, and a consensus that has emerged from decades of research on children’s eyewitness testimony demands that we pause for critical self-reflection. In this piece, we propose that scientists studying children consider a large but siloed body of work on developmentally-sensitive investigative interviewing to facilitate complete, accurate, and honest responding from children in research studies. By examining how researchers phrase questions, how they contextualize questioning, and how they report methodology, we address concrete avenues for ensuring robust and reliable psychological science, as well as pathways for children’s optimal involvement in the research process.
"Did You Ever Fight Back?" Jurors' Questions to Children Testifying in Criminal Trials About Alleged Sexual Abuse
Suzanne St. George, Anastacia Garcia-Johnson, Emily Denne, & Stacia N. Stolzenberg
The current study examined jurors’ questions to children in criminal trials assessing children’s allegations of sexual abuse, demonstrating a new avenue for studying how jurors think about, respond to, and assess evidence. We used qualitative content analysis to examine jurors’ questions to 134, 5- to 17-year-olds alleging sexual abuse in criminal trial testimonies. Five themes emerged: abuse interactions, contextual details of abuse, children’s reactions to abuse, children’s (delayed) disclosure, and case background details. Jurors often ask about abuse dynamics, the context surrounding abuse, and children’s disclosure processes, reflecting common misconceptions about child sexual abuse (CSA), such as whether it is credible to delay disclosure or maintain contact with an alleged perpetrator. This study improves our understanding of how jurors understand and evaluate children’s reports of alleged CSA, suggesting that jurors may struggle to understand children’s reluctance.