The Syndrome and Psychopathology
Child molestation, or sexual abuse of children, is when an older person uses a child for sexual purposes by forcing, asking, or using other methods like child grooming, child sexual exploitation, or indecent exposure. Crimes that involve sexual violence are looked into by the sex crime unit. As an investigator for Child Protective Services who is allowed to serve my community, there are some problems that need to be fixed so that they don’t happen when detectives or investigators from the police department talk to a child who has been a victim of a sex crime.
The first thing we’ll talk about is how to ask questions that lead to answers. A question is suggestive if it makes it seem like a certain answer could be obvious, acceptable, or right. “So, you agreed to kiss, right?” is an example. A suggestive question also makes a false assumption that is accepted as a fact in the question. This kind of question tricks the child being interviewed into giving an answer that might not be true, but it might be true (Duke, Uhl, Price & Wood, 2016). It also makes their feelings change, which could be unintentional or on purpose. “Don’t you think that was wrong?” is another example of a leading question. “Do you think that was wrong to do?” is a much better way to ask the question than “Do you think that was wrong to do?”.
The second area is what it means when other people agree with you. That could be called “the power of disconfirming evidence” or “confirmation bias,” which is when a person looks for information that backs up a belief or idea they already have. Two investigators can have different ideas about a case, but when similar evidence shows up, they both feel like they were right (Kappes, Harvey, Lohrenz, Montague & Sharot, 2020). When a person has an opinion, everything else tends to back it up and agree with it. There could be more evidence that disagrees, but it is ignored or set aside, or some difference sets it aside and rejects it.
The third area is how to use both good and bad results. When questioning a child about a sex crime, it is smart to think about both the good and bad outcomes. A positive consequence, which is also called a reinforcement, shows a child that they have done something wrong. A negative consequence or punishment, on the other hand, shows that the child did something wrong or unacceptable (Albaek, Binder & Milde, 2019). A positive outcome is when the researcher makes it more likely that a certain behavior will happen. On the other hand, when researchers find a bad outcome, they often make it less likely that a behavior will happen again in the future.
The fourth area is asking the same questions over and over again to children who have been sexually abused. When children are asked the same questions over and over with hints, they are more likely to change their answers. So, children are more likely to give in to suggestions (Christensen, 2017). They don’t think they’re making the interviewer happy, so they tend to change what they say. To avoid getting in trouble, kids will give answers they think the interviewers want to hear. Several studies have shown that when adults ask children the same closed-ended question over and over again, the child’s answer changes, which usually doesn’t make the child’s answers more correct.
The fifth area is open to speculation, which is a way for investigators to get children to say things that aren’t true when they are being questioned about sexual abuse. This method of making kids think about what might happen has several parts. First, the kids are asked to pretend or make up their own events (Otgaar, Howe, Merckelbach & Muris, 2018). Second, you should ask these kids to think hard, especially about what they think happened. Third, using the conditional tense in a question, like asking a child what the suspect could have done in that situation.
This method is usually used when a child hasn’t answered his own questions because of emotional or social barriers or because he can’t remember what happened. Most of the time, this technique leads to more wrong answers from children, especially those who remember events only vaguely or don’t remember them at all. It also lets kids use their imaginations, guess, and play games in their heads. Most of the time, it has serious consequences, so it’s not a good idea to use it to get child witnesses to tell the truth.
In cases of sexual abuse, the stories children tell are very important. When figuring out how good a witness’s statement is, you have to look at the interview’s setting and how it was done. In cases of daycare abuse that get a lot of attention, most interview techniques are suggestive and direct. All of the above techniques have been shown to get children to say things that aren’t true. When children are victims or witnesses of sexual abuse, especially in daycare ritual abuse, suggestive interviewing techniques are used to talk to them.
References
Duke, M. C., Uhl, E. R., Price, H., & Wood, J. M. (2016). Avoiding problems in child abuse interviews and investigations. In Forensic interviews regarding child sexual abuse (pp. 219-236). Springer, Cham.
Kappes, A., Harvey, A. H., Lohrenz, T., Montague, P. R., & Sharot, T. (2020). Confirmation bias in the utilization of others’ opinion strength. Nature Neuroscience, 23(1), 130-137.
Albaek, A. U., Binder, P. E., & Milde, A. M. (2019). Entering an emotional minefield: professionals’ experiences with facilitators to address abuse in child interviews. BMC health services research, 19(1), 1-12.
Christensen, L. (2017). Victims of child sexual abuse: The psychology of victims. The Psychology of Criminal and Antisocial Behavior (pp. 419-438). Academic Press.
Otgaar, H., Howe, M. L., Merckelbach, H., & Muris, P. (2018). Who is the better eyewitness? Adults and children. Current Directions in Psychological Science. – essay writers
