The construction of allegedly abused children’s narratives in Scottish criminal courts

References

• Advocates Gateway. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.theadvocatesgateway.org/images/toolkits/6planningtoquestionachildoryoungperson141215.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ahern, E. C., Sadler, L. H., Lamb, M. E., & Gariglietti, G. M. (2016). Wellbeing of professionals working with suspected victims of child sexual exploitation. Child Abuse Review. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1002/car.2439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Bar Association. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/discovery.html
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S.J., Ahern, E., & Lamb, M. E. (in press). Children’s expressions of uncertainty when testifying about alleged sexual abuse in Scottish courts. Behavioural Sciences & the Law.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. J., Ahern, E. C., Stolzenberg, S. N., & Lyon, T. D. (2016). The productivity of wh-prompts when children testify. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 341–349. doi: 10.1002/acp.3204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. J., & Lamb, M. E. (2016). How do lawyers examine and cross-examine children in Scotland? Applied Cognitive Psychology. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. J., Lamb, M. E., & Foster, J.L.H.. (under review). Beliefs about sexual abuse in Scotland: A qualitative analysis.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, S. J., Lamb, M. E., & Lyon, T. D. (2015). Question types, responsiveness and self-contradictions when prosecutors and defense attorneys question alleged victims of child sexual abuse. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29, 253–261. doi: 10.1002/acp.3103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., Billig, M., Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2003). Discourse analysis means doing analysis: A critique of six analytic shortcomings. Retrieved from http://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/open/2002/002/antaki2002002-paper.html
   Google Scholar
• Antrobus, E., McKimmie, B. M., & Newcombe, P. A. (2012). Community members’ beliefs about children in Australian courts. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 497–516. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2011.615721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1, 385–405. doi: 10.1177/146879410100100307
   Google Scholar
• Bornstein, B. H., Kaplan, D. L., & Perry, A. R. (2007). Child abuse in the eyes of the beholder: Lay perceptions of child sexual and physical abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31, 375–391. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.09.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bottoms, B. L., Golding, J. M., Stevenson, M. C., Wiley, T. R., & Yozwiak, J. A. (2007). A review of factors affecting jurors’ decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. R. Toglia (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology: Volume II: Memory for people (Vol. 2, pp. 509–530). Hove: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bowden, P., Henning, T., & Plater, D. (2014). Balancing fairness to victims, society and defendants in the cross-examination of vulnerable witnesses: An impossible triangulation? Melbourne University Law Review, 37, 539–584. doi: oai:apo.org.au:39471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman, C. G. (2016). The legal system and child sex abuse: Ross Cheit’s the witch-hunt narrative: Politics, psychology, and the sexual abuse of children. Law & Social Inquiry, 41, 267–283. doi: 10.1111/lsi.12178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, M. (1995). The discourse of denial: Cross-examining child victim witnesses. Journal of Pragmatics, 23(1), 71–91. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)00032-A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunting, L. (2005). Females who sexually offend against children: Responses of the child protection and criminal justice systems. London: NSPCC. Retrieved from http://217.35.77.12/archive/nireland/papers/welfare/pdfs/Females_who_sexually_offend_against_children.doc
   Google Scholar
• Burns, C. (2004). Constructing rape: Judicial narratives on trial. Japanese Studies, 24, 81–96. doi: 10.1080/10371390410001684723
   Google Scholar
• Burrows, K. S., & Powell, M. (2014). Prosecutors’ recommendations for improving child witness statements about sexual abuse. Policing and Society, 24, 189–207. doi: 10.1080/10439463.2013.784305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cederborg, A. C. (1999). The construction of children’s credibility in judgments of child sexual abuse. Acta Sociologica, 42, 147–158. doi: 10.1177/000169939904200204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cederborg, A., Lamb, M. E., & Laurell, O. (2007). Delay of disclosure, minimization, and denial of abuse when the evidence is unambiguous: A multivictim case. In M. E. Pipe, M. E. Lamb, Y. Orbach, & A. C. Cederborg (Eds.), Child sexual abuse: Disclosure, delay, and denial (pp. 159–173). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cossins, A. (2008). Children, sexual abuse and suggestibility: What laypeople think they know and what the literature tells us. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 15, 153–170. doi: 10.1080/13218710801886040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cossins, A. (2009). Cross-exmaination in child sexual assault trials: Evidentiary safeguarding or an opportunity to confuse. Melb UL Rev, 33, 68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cossins, A., Goodman-Delahunty, J., & O’Brien, K. (2009). Uncertainty and misconceptions about child sexual abuse: Implications for the criminal justice system. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16, 435–452. doi: 10.1080/13218710902930234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromer, L. D., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2010). Child sexual abuse myths: Attitudes, beliefs, and individual differences. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 19, 618–647. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2010.522493
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, G. M., Bull, R., & Milne, R. J. (2016). Analysing and improving the testimony of vulnerable witnesses interviewed under the ‘achieving best evidence’ protocol. In P. Radcliffe, G. H. Gudjonsson, A. Heaton-Armstrong, & D. Wolchover. (Eds.), Witness testimony in sexual cases: Evidential, investigative and scientific perspectives (pp. 217–221). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, E., Henderson, E., & Seymour, F. W. (1997). In reply to: The interests of justice? The cross-examination of child complainants of sexual abuse in criminal proceedings. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 4, 217–229. doi: 10.1080/13218719709524912
   Google Scholar
• Davies, E., & Seymour, F. W. (1998). Questioning child complainants of sexual abuse: Analysis of criminal court transcripts in New Zealand. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 5(1), 47–61. doi: 10.1080/13218719809524919
   Google Scholar
• Ernberg, E., Tidefors, I., & Landström, S. (2016). Prosecutors’ reflections on sexually abused preschoolers and their ability to stand trial. Child Abuse & Neglect, 57, 21–29. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finkelhor, D. (2009). The prevention of childhood sexual abuse. The Future of Children, 19, 169–194. doi: 10.1353/foc.0.0035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. (2014). Using narrative data. In U. Flick (Ed.), An introduction to qualitative research (pp. 263–291). New York, NY: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Gaskell, G., & Bauer, M. W. (2000). Towards public accountability: Beyond sampling, reliability and validity. In B. Gaskell & M. W. Bauer (Eds.), Qualitative researching with text, image and sound (pp. 336–350). New York, NY: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Giglio, J. J., Wolfteich, P. M., Gabrenya, W. K., & Sohn, M. L. (2011). Differences in perceptions of child sexual abuse based on perpetrator age and respondent gender. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 20, 396–412. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2011.593255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman, G. S., & Melinder, A. (2007). Child witness research and forensic interviews of young children: A review. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12, 1–19. doi: 10.1348/135532506X156620
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanna, K., Davies, E., Crothers, C., & Henderson, E. (2012). Questioning child witnesses in New Zealand’s criminal justice system: Is cross-examination fair? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 530–546. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2011.615813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haupert, B. (1991). Vom narrativen Interview zur biographischenTypenbildung. In D. Garz, & K. Kraimer (Eds.), Qualitativ-empirische Sozialforschung (pp. 213–254). Opladen: WestdeutscherVedag.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, D., & Bunting, L. (2013). ‘Just be brave’: The experiences of young witnesses in criminal proceedings in northern Ireland. Child Abuse Review, 22, 419–431. doi: 10.1002/car.2242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, E. (2002). Persuading and controlling: The theory of cross-examination in relation to children. In M. E. Lamb, D. J. La Rooy, L. C. Malloy, & C. Katz (Eds.), Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (pp. 279–293). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons. doi: 10.1002/9780470713679.ch18
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, E. (2016). Best evidence or best interests? What does the case law say about the function of criminal cross-examination? The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 20, 183–199. doi: 10.1177/1365712716642356
   Google Scholar
• Howarth, C. (2006). A social representation is not a quiet thing: Exploring the critical potential of social representations theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 65–86. doi: 10.1348/014466605X43777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, J. Y. (2016). Rape myths and rape by juveniles. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 27, 489–503. doi: 10.1080/14789949.2016.1158848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jack, F., & Zajac, R. (2014). The effect of age and reminders on witnesses’ responses to cross-examination-style questioning. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, S., Newall, E., & Backett-Milburn, K. (2015). Children’s narratives of sexual abuse. Child & Family Social Work, 20, 322–332. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemfuss, J. Z., Cleveland, K. C., Quas, J. A., & Lyon, T. D. (2016). Relations between attorney temporal structure and children’s response productivity in cases of alleged child sexual abuse. Legal and Criminological Psychology. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1111/lcrp.12096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klettke, B., & Mellor, D. (2012). At what age can females consent to sexual activity? A survey of jury-eligible Australians. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 198–208. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2011.559901
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindholm, J., & Cederborg, A. C. (2016). Legal assessments of child victims of human trafficking for sexual purposes. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 34, 218–233. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2228
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marecek, J., Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2004). On the construction of gender, sex, and sexualities. In A. Eagly, A. Beall, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 192–216). New York: The Guildford Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCoy, M. L., & Gray, J. M. (2007). The impact of defendant gender and relationship to victim on juror decisions in a child sexual abuse case. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1578–1593. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00228.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGee, H., O’Higgins, M., Garavan, R., & Conroy, R. (2011). Rape and child sexual abuse: What beliefs persist about motives, perpetrators, and survivors? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 3580–3593. doi: 10.1177/0886260511403762
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscovici, S. (1998). The history and actuality of social representations. In U. Flick (Ed.), The psychology of the social (pp. 209–248). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E., & Capps, L. (1997). Narrative authenticity. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7, 83–89. doi: 10.1075/jnlh.7.09nar
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, D. (2008). Attributions and cognitive closure: Stereotypes of perpetrators and victims of child sexual abuse. The Osprey Journal of Ideas and Inquiry, 7. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unf.edu/ojii_volumes/13/
   Google Scholar
• Peace, K. A., Shudra, R. D., Forrester, D. L., Kasper, R., Harder, J., & Porter, S. (2015). Tall tales across time: Narrative analysis of true and false allegations. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 12, 171–184. doi: 10.1002/jip.1421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 189–206. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plotnikoff, J., & Woolfson, R. (2012). “Kicking and screaming”: The slow road to best evidence. In C. P. Spencer & M. E. Lamb (Eds.), Children and cross-examination: Time to change the rules (pp. 21–41). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Quas, J. A., Thompson, W. C., & Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (2005). Do jurors “know” what isn’t so about child witnesses? Law and Human Behavior, 29, 425–456. doi: 10.1007/s10979-005-5523-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redlich, A. D., & Goodman, G. S. (2003). Taking responsibility for an act not committed: The influence of age and suggestibility. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 141–156. doi: 10.1023/A:1022543012851
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reitz-Krueger, C. L., Warner, T. C., Newsham, R. L., & Reppucci, N. D. (2016). Who’s to blame? Perceptions of adolescents’ maturity and responsibility in sexual relationships with an older partner. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22, 105–113. doi: 10.1037/law0000065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, L. L., & Birkimer, J. C. (2002). Perceptions of child sexual abuse: Victim and perpetrator characteristics, treatment efficacy, and lay vs. legal opinions of abuse. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 11, 53–74. doi: 10.1300/J070v11n01_03
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rogers, P., Lowe, M., & Reddington, K. (2016). Investigating the victim pseudomaturity effect: How a victim’s chronological age and dress style influences attributions in a depicted case of child sexual assault. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25, 1–19. doi:10.1080/10538712.2016.1111964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sexual Offences Act. (2003). Retrieved from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/child-sex-offences
   Google Scholar
• Spencer, J. R., & Lamb, M. E. (Eds.). (2012). Children and cross-examination: Time to change the rules? Hove: Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Stolzenberg, S. N., & Lyon, T. D. (2014). How attorneys question children about the dynamics of sexual abuse and disclosure in criminal trials. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20, 19–30. doi: 10.1037/a0035000
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szojka, Z. A., Andrews, S. J., Lamb, M. E., Stolzenberg, S. N., & Lyon, T. D. (2017). Challenging the credibility of alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Scottish courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(2), 200–210. doi: 10.1037/law0000117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Temkin, J. (2010). “And always keep a-hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse”: Challenging rape myths in the courtroom. New Criminal Law Review: In International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 13, 710–734. doi: 10.1525/nclr.2010.13.4.710
   Google Scholar
• Wade, A. (2002). New measures and new challenges: Children’s experiences of the court process. In H. L. Westcot, G. M. Davies, & R. Bull (Eds.), Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (pp. 219–232). doi: 10.1002/9780470713679.ch14
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, W., Jones, L., Cross, T., & Lippert, T. (2010). Prosecuting child sexual abuse: The importance of evidence type. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 436–454. doi: 10.1177/0011128708320484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weatherred, J. L. (2015). Child sexual abuse and the media: A literature review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 24, 16–34. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2015.976302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, K. G. (2009). “Boys will be boys” and other gendered accounts: An exploration of victims’ excuses and justifications for unwanted sexual contact and coercion. Violence Against Women, 15, 810–834. doi: 10.1177/1077801209333611
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westcott, H. L., & Page, M. (2002). Cross-examination, sexual abuse and child witness identity. Child Abuse Review, 11, 137–152. doi: 10.1002/car.739
   Google Scholar
• Willig, C. (2008). Memory work. In C. Willig (Ed.), Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and method (pp. 125–138). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, J. S., & Balemba, S. (2016). The effect of victim resistance on rape completion: A meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. Advanced online publication. doi:1524838016663934.
   Google Scholar
• Zajac, R., & Hayne, H. (2006). The negative effect of cross-examination style questioning on children’s accuracy: Older children are not immune. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 3–16. doi: 10.1002/acp.1169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zydervelt, S., Zajac, R., Kaladelfos, A., & Westera, N. (2016). Lawyers’ strategies for cross-examining rape complainants: Have we moved beyond the 1950s? British Journal of Criminology. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azw023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar