Credibility Assessment of Misinformed vs. Deceptive Children

dc.contributor.author	Shao, Yi
dc.date.accessioned	2007-07-05T20:03:45Z
dc.date.available	2012-07-05T06:06:50Z
dc.date.issued	2007-07-05T20:03:45Z
dc.description.abstract	This is the first study to contrast how adults make credibility assessments about children who experienced a suggestive interview, children who had been coached to lie, and children who were telling the truth. Nine preschool children were interviewed about an event involving a minor infraction. Three of the children reported the truth, four were coached to lie, and two children reported misinformation as the result of a suggestive interview. Eighty-seven college students watched videotaped interviews of these nine children and assessed their credibility. Children who had experienced a suggestive interview were rated as credible as those who were telling the truth. Children who had been coached to lie were rated as less credible than the two groups of children. The results suggest that misleading information gets incorporated into children?s memory, thus arguing for a cognitive rather than social explanation of suggestibility. The implication for children's court testimony and jury decisions are discussed.	en_US
dc.format.extent	277291 bytes
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf
dc.identifier.other	bibid: 6476352
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/1813/7880
dc.language.iso	en_US	en_US
dc.title	Credibility Assessment of Misinformed vs. Deceptive Children	en_US
dc.type	dissertation or thesis	en_US

Files

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1