↓ Skip to main content

Developing Rapport with Children in Forensic Interviews: Systematic Review of Experimental Research

Overview of attention for article published in Behavioral Sciences & the Law, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Developing Rapport with Children in Forensic Interviews: Systematic Review of Experimental Research
Published in
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/bsl.2186
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The vast majority of guidelines recommend that developing rapport with children is essential for successful forensic child interviewing; however, the question remains as to whether there is a sufficient body of scientific research to generate evidence-based guidelines for developing rapport with children in legal contexts. To answer this question, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify experimental studies of the effects of rapport-building methods on the reliability of children's reports. Independent raters applied 12 exclusion criteria to the 2,761 potentially relevant articles located by electronic and hand searches of the literature. Experimental studies were few. Although studies to date are a beginning, the overall scientific base is weak regarding even basic issues such as how to best define rapport and the efficacy of common rapport-building techniques. This systematic review highlights what we know, what we do not know, and how much more we need to know to create evidence-based best practice. Recommendations for reshaping the research agenda are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Lecturer 4 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 47 47%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 47 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2020.
All research outputs
#4,441,925
of 26,801,235 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral Sciences & the Law
#175
of 778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,054
of 276,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral Sciences & the Law
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,801,235 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,699 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.