Genevieve Waterhouse, Anne Ridley, Rachel Wilcock , Ray Bull & David La Rooy

1. An Analysis of Repeated Interviews: Changes in Interviewer Behaviour and Child Interviewees’ Responses Genevieve Waterhouse, Anne Ridley, Rachel Wilcock, Ray Bull & David La Rooy

2. Repeated Interviews with Child Victims/Witnesses • Repeat interviews about a crime are only recommended in exceptional circumstances in UK interviewing guidelines: • When a child does not disclose in the first interview but becomes willing to disclose, or reveals that they have more information to discuss. • When there is new information to be discussed. • When extra time is needed to cover the allegations. • When rapport is poor in the first interview, or the child does not trust the interviewer. • If the child is too distressed at the time of the initial interview. (Scottish Executive Guidelines, 2003) (Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, 2011)

3. Repeated Interviewing – The Research • A lot of work has been done to encourage interviewers to interview children only once. • Restrictions in place to avoid possible increased suggestibility caused by repeat interviewing (e.g., Leichtman & Ceci, 1995; Krähenbühl, Blades, & Eiser, 2009).

4. Repeated Interviewing – The Research • But just effect of poor interviewing techniques? (Faller, Cordisco-Steele, & Nelson-Gardell, 2010) • Studies conducted in the field using best practice repeat interviews show children to recall more information (Hershkowitz & Terner, 2007). • The experimental research suggests this extra information is likely to be mostly accurate (La Rooy, Pipe, & Murray, 2005; Odinot, Wolters, & Van Giezen, 2013).

5. This Research • Repeated interviewing does occur. • Very few guidelines as to how to conduct repeat interviews when they are necessary. • So how are interviewers conducting them? • This research aims to determine how interviewer and interviewee verbal behaviours change over interview number. • Question type. • Amount of Information recalled. • Topic of information recalled. • Novelty/consistency of information. • Relevance to investigation. • Preliminary, exploratory exercise.

6. Transcripts • 14 Scottish cases: 21 children, 54 interviews. • Average number of interviews: 2.52 (range 2-5). • Average age: 7.5 years (range 3-14). • Gender: 52.4% male. • Allegation: 61.9% CSA, 19% physical abuse, 4.8% both, 14.3% CSA and domestic violence. • Victim-Perpetrator Relationship: 61.9% parental, 28.6% other familial, 9.5% extra-familial.

7. Interview Details

8. Reasons for Second Interview 4 interviews 19% 8 interviews 38.1% 3 14.3% 1 – 4.8% 2 9.5% 3 14.3%

9. Reasons for third interview 3 interviews 42.9% 3 interviews 42.9% 1 interview 14.3%

10. Question Types Percentage

11. Details given by Children * p<.05 *

12. Child Recall Consistency 138 details 81 details 15 6 5 4

13. Details of High Investigation-Relevance

14. Summary • Police officers appear to be conducting repeat interviews in a similar manner to initial interviews. • Children react to second and third interviews in a similar way to initial interviews. • Respond with similar proportions of detail types. • Provide similar number of details. • In second and third interviews, children provide mostly new consistent details. • The proportion and amount of new consistent details are consistent across second and third interviews.

15. Implications • Repeat interviewing does not seem to have any negative effects on children‘s recall. • Children still have more to say – possibly due to reminiscence. • They are very consistent. • Although interviews generally quite good, children’s interviewing still relies too heavily on option-posing questioning and interviewers do not use enough open questions. • Practitioners should consider including repeat interviewing tips in training.

16. Limitations • Relatively small number of transcripts. • No way of telling accuracy of information recalled. • Further research needed with more transcripts!

17. Thank you for listening!