Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
can children provide reliable eyewitness testimony
can children provide reliable eyewitness testimony
the importance of child protection policy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: can children provide reliable eyewitness testimony
Over the last thirty years, the idea of children as witnesses and the accuracy of their testimony has been widely debated. People are asking themselves if the memories of young children, specifically between the ages of five and ten, can be accurate and in return trusted. So, can children’s memory and testimony be accurate? Prolific amounts of research have been conducted in an attempt to answer this question. Most of the research suggests that unfortunately we can not rely on their accurate recall in testimony. I would have to say I agree with the findings.
The current anxiety about the validity of children’s testimony in court stems mostly from heavily publicized cases of child molestation during the 1980’s (Meyer, 1997). As a result of society’s reaction to dramatic increases in reports of abuse and neglect, children increasingly are being admitted as witnesses in juvenile and criminal proceedings (Ceci & de Bruyn, 1993). Each year hundreds of thousands of children in North America become entangled in the legal system. Often these children testify about the alleged actions of a parent, teacher, baby-sitter, relative or neighbor. And when this happens, the case is often decided on the basis of the relative credibility of the child versus the defendant. Regardless of whether such testimony is made in forensic interviews, during preliminary hearings, or at trial, it may result in life altering decisions for all involved (Ceci & Bruck, 1995).
The issue of children’s veracity is not new to the courtroom. There were cases in Puritan times in which youngsters’ testimony was responsible for the imprisonment and execution of a number of individuals accused of being witches (Meyer, 1997). Because of this, for both theoretical and practical reasons, many child psychologists, legal professionals, and others have long sought to understand more fully the extent to which young children are able to recall their experiences and to report on them accurately. As part of this effort, there has also been a great interest in learning more about the developmental course through which young children acquire the capacity (Stern, Stern, & Lamiell, 1999).
To thoroughly understand the subject, we must look closely at several aspects and effects of children as witnesses in the lega...
... middle of paper ...
...esses in Court: A Growing Dilemma. Children Today, 22.
Franklin, D. (1999). Child Witness Credibility. Retrieved 10-02-01 from Psychology Information online:
Garry, M., & Palaschek, D. L. (2000). Imagination and Memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 6-9.
Goodman, G. & Levine, M. (1991). Child Witnesses and the Confrontation Clause: The American Psychological Association brief in Maryland v. Graig. Law and Human Behavior, 5, 13-29.
Koriat, A., Goldsmith, M., Schneider, W., & Nakash-Dura, M. (2001). The Credibility of Children’s Testimony: Can Children Control the Accuracy of Their Memory Reports?. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 79, 405-437.
Meyer, J. F. (1997). Inaccuracies in Children’s Testimony.
United States: Hawthoren Press.
Myers, D. (1996). Exploring Psychology (3rd ed.). Michigan
So the question remains, Can we rely on children? Under unbiased, highly trained, standardized ways of interviewing.....the answer is yes. Clinicians who have had the training necessary to evaluate and judge are completely capable of interviewing these children because children are indeed competent and qualified to testify on the witness stand. Open ended questioning, yes-no questioning, selective questioning (man or woman) and identification questioning (what time was it?) are key ways of interviewing to provide for accurate recollection. And when a child is asked these questions in a neutral way, you can believe that they are telling the truth.
Memory is not reliable; memory can be altered and adjusted. Memory is stored in the brain just like files stored in a cabinet, you store it, save it and then later on retrieve and sometimes even alter and return it. In doing so that changes the original data that was first stored. Over time memory fades and becomes distorted, trauma and other events in life can cause the way we store memory to become faulty. So when focusing on eyewitnesses, sometimes our memory will not relay correct information due to different cues, questioning, and trauma and so forth, which makes eyewitness even harder to rely on. Yet it is still applied in the criminal justice system.
The situation that I have thought of is, when I was on the jury for juveniles who committed first offenses. While I was listening to the lawyers depend these kids, I looked on the list and saw a familiar name. The name was a person I went to kindergarten with. She was being convicted of shoplifting. I could not believe it. All the thoughts of that soft, kind-hearted person went out the window. My behaviors were changed by the environmental influences. My thoughts were overcome with coldness. I felt that she choose her situation. Somewhere along she became part of the wrong crowd and never changed her situation. I also think that the situation changed what I thought of her.
False memories being created is obvious through many different ways, such as eye-witness testimonies and past experiments that were conducted, however repression is an issue that has many baffled. There seems to be little evidence on the factual basis of repressed memories, and many argue that it does not exist. The evidence for repression in laboratories is slowly emerging, but not as rapidly as the evidence for false memories. It has been hard to clinically experiment with repressed memories because most memories are unable to be examined during the actual event to corroborate stories. Experimenters are discovering new ways to eliminate this barrier by creating memories within the experiment’s initial phase. This is important for examining the creation of false memories during the study phase. This research study will explore the differences between recovered memories and false memories through research and experiments. Other terms and closely related terms will be discussed, while examining any differences, in relation to repressed memories. The possibility of decoding an actual difference between recovered memories and false memories, through biological techniques. Because false memories can be created, examining these creations in a laboratory setting can shed light on facts overlooked. Exploring these issues will also help with the development of better therapeutic techniques for therapists in dealing with memories. This can lead to an easier process for patients and therapists if they must go through the legal system in relation to an uncovered memory.
Thousands of kid criminals in the United States have been tried as adults and sent to prison (Equal Justice Initiative). The debate whether these kids should be tried as adults is a huge controversy. The decision to try them or to not try them as an adult can change their whole life. “Fourteen states have no minimum age for trying children as adults” (Equal Justice Initiative). Some people feel that children are too immature to fully understand the severity of their actions. People who are for kids to be tried as adults feel that if they are old enough to commit the crime, then they are old enough to understand what they are doing. There are people who feel that children should only be tried as adults depending on the crime.
Valentine, T., & Maras, K. (2011). The effect of cross-examination on the accuracy of adult eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 554-561. doi: 10.1002/acp.1768
Minor consequences, might for instance, be confusing where one has placed something, like car keys. Such confusion can result in a simple inconvenience such as, the wasting of time. Although more serious consequence might for instance occur when one’s memory tricks the individual into giving false eyewitness accounts that might be costly to him, or other third parties. As such, it is important to critically analyze the dynamics of false memory formation and highlight methods that could be used to identi...
Every day a child is called on to testify in a courtroom. Children who have to testify in open court are easily influenced by outside sources. This paper will show the reasons children should not be used as witnesses in a courtroom. I will show all the different influences that a child receives and prove them uncredible. The interview process can influence a child greatly. Ceci and Bruck (1995) found a study that shows that child witnesses may be questioned up to12 times during the course of an investigation. The questioning process can take up to a year and a half to be completed. Children are not capable of remembering exact details for that period. Their answers to questions will change each time he or she is asked. This is because they do not retain information in the same way as an adult. Most studies have shown that children start to lose their ability to recall an event accurately only 10 days after the original event has happened. Another factor in a child’s ability to recall an event is stress. A child can go into a shock stage and repress all memories of what has happened to them. These memories may not resurface for many years. This affects a child’s ability to identify the suspect in photo and live line-ups. The amount of stress a child goes through affects their ability to answer questions in an interview, if they cannot remember what has happened, how are they supposed to answer the myriad of questions the interviewer will ask them.
a child is the only witness to a crime, but until the time that sufficient
Have you ever been an eyewitness at the scene of a crime? If you were, do you think that you would be able to accurately describe, in precise detail, everything that happened and remember distinct features of the suspect? Many people believe that yes they would be able to remember anything from the events that would happen and the different features of the suspect. Some people, in fact, are so sure of themselves after witnessing an event such as this that they are able to testify that what they think they saw was indeed what they saw. However, using an eyewitness as a source of evidence can be risky and is rarely 100% accurate. This can be proven by the theory of the possibility of false memory formation and the question of whether or not a memory can lie.
Zajac, R. & Hayne H. (2003). I don’t think that’s what really happened: The effect of cross-examination on the accuracy of children’s repots. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 187-195.
We can imply this finding of false memory in many ways in our lives. We all should note that our memory cannot be trusted 100% and we should not solely rely on our memory when it comes to making critical decisions. Just like the murder trial example used in earlier, when it comes to eye witnessing, the judge should take possible false memory into account when making the final decisions and try to obtain objective evidence along with the memory of the witness.
Eyewitness testimony is especially vulnerable to error when the question is misleading or when there’s a difference in ethnicity. However, using an eyewitness as a source of evidence can be risky and is rarely 100% accurate. This can be proven by the theory of the possibility of false memory formation and the question of whether or not a memory can lie. For instance, a group of students saw the face of a young man with straight hair, then heard a description of the face supposedly written by another witness, one that wrongly mentioned light, curly hair. When they reconstructed the face using a kit of facial features, a third of their reconstructions contained the misleading detail, whereas only 5 percent contained it when curly hair was not mentioned (Page 359). This situation shows how misleading information from other sources can be profoundly altered.
Cognitive Interviewing is a form of interviewing which was originally developed to be utilized with adult witnesses. This technique involves mentally reconstructing the event, recalling the event in different sequences, and describing the event from various perspectives to get as many details about the event as possible (Cronch et al, 2006). It has been found to increase the information adults give in an interview by 35-45 percent (Milne et al, 2013). A couple of studies suggested that it could be difficult for children to recall so many details about the event in a Cognitive interview and that it seemed to work better with older children (Cronch et al, 2006; Saywitz et al, 1992). The level of a child’s cognition is not just an issue for Forensic
Children are extremely susceptible to recalling false memories due to suggestive questioning (Quas et al., 1999). Therefore, it is very important that the most accurate testimony is retrieved from the child, and this can be done through emotional focusing. It has been found that emotional focusing increases autobiographical memory, meaning that the more emotionally focused the child is, the better they remember events from their own life (Drummond, Dritschel, Astell, O’Carroll, & Dalgleish 2006). In one study, children were taken to a pretend zoo and reminisced about their experience two days later. They found that children who reminisced about emotions recalled more information about the tr...