Investigative Interviewing of Aboriginal Children in Cases of Suspected Sexual Abuse.

ABSTRACT

This study examined the investigative interviewing of Australian Aboriginal children in cases of alleged sexual abuse, with a focus on three commonly included components of interview protocols ground rules, practice narrative, and substantive phase. Analysis of 70 field transcripts revealed that the overall delivery and practice of ground rules at the beginning of the interview was positively associated with the spontaneous usage of rules in children's narratives of abuse. When specifically examining the "don't know" rule, however, only practice had an effect of children's usage of the rule (as opposed to simple delivery or no delivery at all). Children spoke more words overall, and interviewers used more open-ended prompts during the substantive phase when the interviews contained a practice narrative. Children most often disclosed sexual abuse in response to an open-ended prompt; however, they produced the most words in response to suggestive prompts. This article concludes with a discussion of the effectiveness of ground rules, practice narratives, and questioning with Aboriginal children.