↓ Skip to main content

Talking Past Each Other: Interviewer and Child Verbal Exchanges in Forensic Interviews

Overview of attention for article published in Law and Human Behavior, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
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
Talking Past Each Other: Interviewer and Child Verbal Exchanges in Forensic Interviews
Published in
Law and Human Behavior, January 2016
DOI 10.1037/lhb0000171
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We used sequential analysis to examine the relationship between interviewer question types, child responsiveness, and subsequent interviewer prompting in 103 forensic interviews investigating sexual abuse allegations with children (6-16 years old). Broad open-ended prompts were more likely to elicit responses (83%) than nonresponses (17%) from children, but nonresponding was more highly associated with this type of prompt than expected by chance. Closed-ended prompts elicited more responses (96%) than nonresponses (4%) from children, and these prompts were more likely to elicit a response than expected by chance. Interviewers did not consistently engage in "pairing" and generally did not alter their questioning style in response to children's behavior. As expected, more frequent use of pairing was positively associated with open-ended prompting and negatively associated with focused prompting. Similarly, children's responding style remained consistent irrespective of the questions posed to them. Thus, much of the interviews seemed to be composed of interviewers and children talking past one another. Interviewing training and supervision of interviewing practice may benefit by including a focus on the pairing principle. (PsycINFO Database Record

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 2 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 60 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 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 57%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 18 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,851,761
of 26,801,235 outputs
Outputs from Law and Human Behavior
#617
of 1,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,616
of 404,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Law and Human Behavior
#25
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,801,235 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 404,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.