An Examination of the Limitations in Investigative Interviewers' Use of Open-Ended Questions

Abstract

Best-practice guidelines in the area of investigative interviewing of children specify the importance of using open-ended questions. However, use of open-ended questions per se does not maximise interview outcome; open-ended questions can vary markedly in quality. The aim of this study was to identify the nature of investigative interviewers' limitations when using open-ended questions, and to compare how representative these limitations are in three distinct interview paradigms. These interview paradigms include: (a) interviews in which trained actors played the role of a 5–6-year-old child; (b) interviews where 5–6-year-old children recalled an innocuous event that was staged in their school; and (c) actual field interviews where child witnesses aged 5 to 7 years recalled an abusive event. Overall, several common problems that would restrict children's opportunity to provide elaborate and accurate narrative accounts of events were identified and described. Our identification of these problems (using a dichotomous rating scale) was found to be consistent with an independent expert, and their presence was not limited to those interviewers who used a low frequency of open-ended questions. The implications of the findings for researchers and trainers in the area of investigative interviewing of children are discussed.

Key words:

• child sexual abuse
• investigative interviewer training
• investigative interviewing

Acknowledgements

The research was funded by a Deakin University Faculty Grant. We thank the managers, police officers and child protection workers who volunteered to participate in this project. Thanks also to Carolyn Hughes-Scholes for her assistance with coding and to Michael Davis for assisting with the quantitative analyses.

Notes

1.This is due to lack of ongoing practice and feedback after training programmes have ceased (Powell et al., 2005).

2.Importantly, the focus of the analysis was solely on the questions used by the interviewers; not the children's responses. As we were reliant on written transcripts, as opposed to videotapes, we could not evaluate interviewers' use of non-verbal or minimal encouragers.