The Perceived Credibility of Child Eyewitnesses: What Happens When They Use Their Own Words?

Abstract

How do triers-of-fact judge the credibility of children versus that of adults as eyewitnesses? We argue that there are two processes to consider in answering this question and that previous research has examined only one of these processes, namely, biases and stereotypes possessed by triers-of-fact. The first process, and the one that separates our's from previous research, involves the inferences about accuracy or believability that triers-of-fact discern from the qualities of the testimony itself. If a child appears to have little confidence and pauses at inappropriate points in response to questions, for example, that child might be judged to be less credible than an adult who is more confident or pauses less frequently. On the other hand, a child who appears more confident than an adult might be judged to be more credible than the adult. In other words, we propose that the factors that seem to drive the credibility of adult eyewitness testimony (such as confidence; see Wells, Ferguson & Lindsay, 1981) also drive the credibility of child eyewitness testimony. If children and adults differ systematically on these quality-of-testimony variables, their testimony should be differentially credible as well.