The Interactional Costs of “Neutrality” in Police Interviews with Child Witnesses

References

• Antaki, C., Richardson, E., Stokoe, E., & Willott, S. (2015a). Dealing with the distress of people with intellectual disabilities reporting sexual assault and rape. Discourse Studies, 17(4), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615578962
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., Richardson, E., Stokoe, E., & Willott, S. (2015b). Police interviews with vulnerable people alleging sexual assault: Probing inconsistency and questioning conduct. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(3), 328–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, J. M., & Drew, P. (1979). Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Beach, W. A. (1993). Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ “okay” usages. Journal of Pragmatics, 19(4), 325–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90092-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benneworth, K. (2006). Repertoires of paedophilia: Conflicting descriptions of adult-child sexual relationships in the investigative interview. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 13(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.2006.13.2.189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buttny, R., & Morris, G. H. (2001). Accounting. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 285–301). Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Chevalier, F. H. G., & Moore, J. (2015). Producing and managing restricted activities: Avoidance and withholding in institutional interaction. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Childs, C., & Walsh, D. (2017). Self-disclosure and self-deprecating self-reference: Conversational practices of personalization in police interviews with children reporting alleged sexual offenses. Journal of Pragmatics, 121, 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Childs, C., & Walsh, D. (2018). Paradoxical invitations: Challenges in soliciting more information from child witnesses. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(4), 363–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1524561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayman, S., & Heritage, J. (2002). The news interview. Journalists and public figures on air. Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Deckert, S. (2010). Co-animation of and resistance to the construction of witness, victim, and perpetrator identities in forensic interviews with children. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 7(2–3), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427581003757483
   Google Scholar
• Dekens, K., & Van der Sleen, J. (2013). Handleiding het kind als getuige. Stapel & De Koning.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, P. (1990). Strategies in the contest between laywer and witness in cross-examination. In J. N. Levi & A. G. Walker (Eds.), Language in the judicial process (pp. 39–64). Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich, S. (2001). Representing rape: Language and sexual consent. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fogarty, K. (2010). ‘Just say it in your own words’ the social interactional nature of investigative interviews into child sexual abuse. (MA/PdD). University of Adelaide.
   Google Scholar
• Gaines, P. (2011). The multifunctionality of discourse operator okay: Evidence from a police interview. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3291–3315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hepburn, A., & Potter, J. (2007). Crying receipts: Time, empathy, and institutional practice. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 40(1), 89–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701331299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2005). “Active listening”: Formulations and the elicitation of feelings-talk in child counselling. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3), 303–329. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3803_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2007). The discourse of child counselling. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Iversen, C. (2019). Beyond accessing information: Claiming to understand in child social welfare interviews. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(3), 550–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsen, K. K., Langballe, Å., & Schultz, J.-H. (2017). Trauma-exposed young victims: Possibilities and constraints for providing trauma support within the investigative interview. Psychology, Crime and Law, 23(5), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2016.1269903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 346–369). Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Jol. (2020). Police interviews with child witnesses: A conversation analysis [Doctoral dissertation]. Radboud Repository. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/214618
   Google Scholar
• Jol, & Stommel. (2016a). Ethical considerations of secondary data use: What about informed consent? Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.5.2.06jol
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jol, & Stommel. (2016b). Resisting the legitimacy of the question: Self-evident answers to questions about sources of knowledge in police interviews with child witnesses. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 1(2), 345–374. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2016-0014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jol, Stommel, & Spooren. (2019). Misleading the alleged offender: Child witnesses’ displays of competence in police interviews. In J. Lamerichs, S. Danby, A. Bateman, & S. Ekberg (Eds.), Children’s social competence in mental health talk (pp. 115–136). Palgrave macMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kidwell, M. (2009). What happened?: An epistemics of before and after in “at-the-scene” police questioning. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802671727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komter, M. (1995). The distribution of knowledge in courtroom interaction. In P. T. Have & G. Psathas (Eds.), Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities (pp. 107–128). University Press of America.
   Google Scholar
• Komter, M. (1998). Dilemmas in the courtroom: A study of trials of violent crime in the Netherlands. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Komter, M. (1994). Accusations and defences in courtroom interaction. Discourse & Society, 5(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926594005002002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacLeod, N. (2016). “I thought I’d be safe there”: Pre-empting blame in the talk of women reporting rape. Journal of Pragmatics, 96, 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazeland, H. (2016). The positionally sensitive workings of the Dutch particle nou. In P. Auer & Y. Maschler (Eds.), NU/NÅ: A family of discourse markers across the languages of Europe and beyond (pp. 377–409). De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Justice in England and Wales. (2011). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures. HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newbury, P., & Johnson, A. (2006). Suspects’ resistance to constraining and coercive questioning strategies in the police interview. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 13(2), 213–240. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v13i2.213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, B. (1999). Reformulating dispute narratives through active listening. Mediation Quarterly, 17(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.3890170207
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1978). Attributions of responsibility: Blamings. Sociology, 12(1), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857801200107
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rassin, E., & van Koppen, P. J. (2002). Het verhoren van kinderen in zedenzaken. In P. J. van Koppen, D. J. Hessing, H. Merckelbach, & H. F. M. Crombag (Eds.), Het recht van binnen: Psychologie van het recht (pp. 507–530). Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor - A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–324). Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, E., Stokoe, E., & Antaki, C. (2018). Establishing intellectually impaired victims’ understanding about ‘truth’ and ‘lies’: Police interview guidance and practice in cases of sexual assault. Applied Linguistics, 40(5), 773–792. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. D. (2016). Accountability in social interaction [1 online resource (x, 364 pages): Illustrations]. Oxford University Press. http://public.ebookcentral.proquest.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=4545574
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, M. J., & Sheehan, M. A. (1983). Over the wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in campaign ‘80. Russell Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 54–69). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Sikveland, R. O., Kevoe-Feldman, H., & Stokoe, E. (2019). Overcoming suicidal person’s risistance using productive communicative challenges during police crisis negotiations. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 533–551. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sliedrecht, K. Y (2013). Formulations in institutionele interactie: De praktijk van ‘samenvatten’ in het politieverhoor, sollicitatiegesprek en journalistiek interview. (PhD) [Doctoral dissertation], Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. VU Research Portal. https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/42123647/cover.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stivers, T. (2012). Physician–child interaction: When children answer physicians’ questions in routine medical encounters. Patient Education and Counseling, 87(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.07.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivers, T., & Heritage, J. (2001). Breaking the sequential mold: Answering `more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking. Text, 21(1/2), 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.21.1-2.151
   Google Scholar
• Van Charldorp, T. (2011). From police interrogation to police record. (PhD). Vrije Universiteit.
   Google Scholar
• Weatherall, A., & Stubbe, M. (2015). Emotions in action: Telephone-mediated dispute resolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(2), 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12082
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodhams, J., Cooke, C., Harkins, L., & Silva, T. da. (2012). Leadership in multiple perpetrator stranger rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(4), 728–752. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260511423244
   Google Scholar
• Wooffitt, R. (1992). Telling tales of the unexpected: The organization of factual discourse. Harvester.
   Google Scholar