NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... recalled less correct information than did older children, especially about what happened, and about what the games were, though there was no difference in memory for the adult person's appearance. There was also no difference in total recall whether the children were participants or bystanders. In terms of childrens memories, this was an unusual finding in that participation usually involves giving more attention to the task, and more active processing, which should increase recall. Yet this did not happen.
In regard to misleading questions, the 4 -year-olds were as resistant as the 7 -year-olds. Pre-operational children are supposed to be more open to make-believe, but this did not happen. Among the 4 -year-olds, the bystanders were more open to misleading suggestions than were the 4 -year-old participants. But further analysis showed that even this "bystander" difference disappeared if "dont know" answers were included in the analysis of responses. A "dont know" response could be interpreted as "passive resistance" to suggestion (Rudy & Goodman, 1991, p. 535). The researchers found hardly any "commission" errors for the misleading questions.
A commission error is where the child answers that something happened when it did not. An omission error is when the child says something did not happen when it did. Younger children made more omission errors. The researchers concluded that while older children had better recall of what happened, younger children were a lot more resistant to misleading questions than is often thought to be the case.
Moreover, childrens recall, and resistance to suggestion, was greater if they had actually participated in the event, especially for the younger children. Younger children had difficulty stating the adults age, but their scores improved dramatically when given a photo identification line-up to look at. This relates to young childrens difficulties in counting. A better procedure for them was the visual photo line-up. Finally, one child came up with some magical interpretations, (e.
g. , that the adult waved a magic wand to make the other little boy disappear). This links with young childrens make-believe thinking. Researchers have also found that children most likely to be vulnerable to leading questions are 3 - to 5 -year-olds (Ceci, Ross, & Toglia, 1987). Preschoolers may think that something happened because an adult has asked them about it.
In other words they defer to the status of the adult. Another possible reason why preschoolers give inaccurate testimony is that their memories for events are likely to fade faster than older children and adults, simply because they have less memory capacity. Much of the research on childrens eyewitness memories has been carried out at a more general theoretical level of childrens memory capacities and strategies, rather than at an applied level, such as the specific problem of childrens ability to recall events in a courtroom situation. Also, research on memory for possible abusive situations has been conducted with non-abused children.
This research has been with children who come from protective families in middle-class homes. Abused children often come from very different backgrounds, so it is not clear how well the research on this topic generalise's to the subjects of abuse. Saywitz (1995) suggested several ways to improve childrens ability to testify accurately in court. One way is to ask better questions. In a courtroom situation, children are faced with very complex requirements. The vocabulary of questions can be problematic.
Children can understand some courtroom words (e. g. , truth, lie, promise, remember), yet not others (e. g. , charges, allegation, defendant, jury). For younger children "charges" are what you do with your credit card; "jury" is taken to mean jewellery like their mother wears. Long questions are difficult for young children to understand. Unclear language (e.
g. , is that not true? ) is difficult for young children. Children are sometimes asked to show skills they have not yet acquired. For example, children are asked questions that require them to be able to count (e. g. , describe someones height, the time of day, distance from the crime, etc), when they cant count.
Better questions would ask the child to answer without counting, such as "Is the person old enough to drive a car?" or "Can you point on the wall to show me how tall the man was?" The environment may also affect childrens testimony. Some children may be very stressed by the courtroom atmosphere. They may experience embarrassment, fear of having to testify in front of the accused, fear of upsetting family, fear of strangers, fear of being yelled at. This fear, or anxiety could lead to biased answers towards or against the defendant.
For example if the child were scared of the defendant, then the child may be more reluctant to answer questions which incriminate him or her, or merely burst out in tears, unable to answer the simplest of questions. Equally if the child were more familiar and friendly with the accused then they would also be less likely to incriminate the defendant, but for the opposite reason. However each child is different to the next, and so their own individual perceptions of the world, and memory ability would affect how reliable their answers are to the questions asked. For example if the child were more courageous then he or she may be more likely to point out the defendant. However this courageousness could also take the form of stubbornness, which in turn could lead to incrimination, where there is none. Research on the subject of childrens individual personalities (long-term behaviour patterns) or sustainable individual moods (short-term behaviour patterns) in relation to childrens biased or non-biased testimonies would be helpful on the topic.
The results could then be linked to real and false childrens memory. In conclusion, childrens reliability as witnesses is controversial. Many juries are sceptical of testimony given by children under 11 years of age. The research suggests that younger children are less reliable as witnesses, particularly if they are very young, such as 3 - and 4 -year-olds.
Other research suggests that young children can give accurate testimony if the language of their questioners is clear, and if they are given appropriate ways of demonstrating what they remember (e. g. , a photo line-up). Children also give better recall and are less open to suggestion if they have actively participated in the event rather than acted as a bystander. Children give more accurate testimony if the questioner is warm and supportive, and if the questions are open-ended. Efforts have also been made to reduce the stress and formality of the courtroom environment in which children give testimony. Children seem to be less stressed and frightened if they are able to give testimony in a supportive situation.
References Ceci, S. J. , and Bruck, M. (1993). Suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403 - 439. Ceci, S. J. , Ross, D.
F. , & Toglia, M. P. (1987). Age differences in suggestibility: Psychological implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 38 - 49.
Feb, D. 1985, Age of witness competency: Cognitive Correlates, Unpublished B. Sc. (Hons) thesis, Department of Psychology, Monash University. Goodman, G. S. & Reed, R. S. 1986, 'Age differences in eyewitness testimony', Law and Human Behaviour, vol. 10, pp. 317 - 32. Goodman, G.
S. , & Schaaf, J. M. (1997). Over a decade of research on childrens eyewitness testimony: What have we learned? Where do we go from here? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, S 5 -S 20. Poole, D.
A. , & Lindsay, D. S. (1995). Interviewing preschoolers: Effects of non suggestive techniques, parental coaching, and leading questions on reports of non experienced events. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60, 129 - 154.
Rudy, L. , & Goodman, G. (1991). Effects of participation on childrens reports: Implications for childrens testimony. Developmental Psychology, 27, 527 - 538. Saywitz, K. J. 1987, 'Children's testimony age- related patterns of memory errors', in Children's Eyewitness Memory, eds S.
J. Ceci, M. P. Toglia, & D.
F. Ross, Springer-Verlag, New York. Saywitz, K. J. (1995).
Improving childrens testimony: The question, the answer, and the environment. In M. S. Zaragoza, J.
R. Graham, G. C. Hall, R.
Hirsch man, & Y. S. Ben-Port (Eds. ), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 113 - 140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Free research essays on topics related to: young childrens, younger children, year olds, abused children, older children
Research essay sample on How Reliable Are Young Children As Eyewitnesses
