Deakin University
Browse

File(s) under permanent embargo

A review of the impact of different types of leading interview questions on child and adult witnesses with intellectual disabilities

journal contribution
posted on 2013-01-01, 00:00 authored by Peter Bowles, Stefanie SharmanStefanie Sharman
Children and adults with intellectual disabilities have traditionally been considered poor witnesses because they are easily misled and produce less accurate information in interviews when compared with individuals without intellectual disabilities. However, witnesses’ levels of accuracy depend on the types of questions that they are asked, such as whether they are open or closed and whether they contain misleading information. In the current systematic review, we examined the literature investigating the different types of misleading questions commonly used in interviews, and their influence on the memories of adults and children with and without an intellectual disability. Thirteen articles that met inclusion criteria were reviewed. It was found that, compared with other question types, open and closed questions that presumed certain information to be true elicited the greatest number of errors in children and adults with intellectual disabilities compared with other question types. These findings reinforce the notion that the onus is on interviewers – particularly when interviewing vulnerable witnesses – to avoid leading questions that presume information that may not be true.

History

Journal

Psychiatry, psychology and law

Volume

21

Issue

2

Pagination

205 - 217

Publisher

Routledge

Location

Oxford, England

ISSN

1321-8719

Language

eng

Publication classification

C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal

Copyright notice

2013, Taylor & Francis