Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Children testimony essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Children testimony essay
The purpose of this document is to explain the relationship between children’s memory and testimony. There are several ways that children’s memory can affect the testimony given by them. To begin, inaccuracies in children’s testimony are difficult to pinpoint. However, there are a few possible causes to inaccuracies. These possible causes are memory, suggestibility, and obedience to authority (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998). One major issue brought up by the journal article, Truth in Children’s Testimony is the memory of children. The memory of children is so easily corrupted (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998). Children will say what the adults want them to say most of the time to please the adults (Anderson, …show more content…
A childs memory isn’t so great and can be easily manipulated. (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998) According to the article Truth in Children’s Testimony, “stress tends to focus children’s memories on important information at the expense of peripheral details”. This means that children will remember major details of the crime, but not the minor details. Children are also unlikely to come up with crimes themselves (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998). According to the article, Truth in Children’s Testimony, “the main concern with children’s testimony is not their ability to remember, but the potential for suggestibility” (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998). Children may also be easily swayed to give a certain answer because they were told to by the adults. This is obedience to authority. This affects the reliability of the children’s testimony majorly. The adult or suspect may be a murderer or rapist, and the child could be deceptive about what actually happened because that adult figure either threatened them if they didn’t give a good answer, or that the child thinks that it’s parents could never do wrong (Anderson, Truth in Children's Testimony, 1998). Children may remain loyal to authoritative figures during
An example to support this argument is when the narrator overhears his mother speaking to a neighbor about Mary's belief in Santa Claus, “...I thought she would believe forever...I practically had to tell her” (MacLeod 301). After overhearing this conversation his hypothesis was right, Santa Claus is not real. The main character's childhood is cut short as he now know the truth. In the following paragraph the narrator shows that the childhood for his younger siblings is well and alive by the statement “Kenneth however, believes with an unadulterated fervour, and so do Bruce and Barry...” ( MacLeod, 301). In this paragraph he also shows where the innocence of youth in his older sisters Anne and Mary is quickly vanishing by the statement “...Anne who is thirteen and Mary who is fifteen, both of whom seem to be leaving childhood at an alarming rate...”( MacLeod, 301). Not only the main character is going through a transformation of innocence to reality it is also his siblings who are trying to grow up by letting go of Santa
Memory is not reliable; memory can be altered and adjusted. Memory is stored in the brain just like files stored in a cabinet, you store it, save it and then later on retrieve and sometimes even alter and return it. In doing so that changes the original data that was first stored. Over time memory fades and becomes distorted, trauma and other events in life can cause the way we store memory to become faulty. So when focusing on eyewitnesses, sometimes our memory will not relay correct information due to different cues, questioning, and trauma and so forth, which makes eyewitness even harder to rely on. Yet it is still applied in the criminal justice system.
The reliability of children’s eyewitness testimony is a controversial issue. Opinions range from proponents believing that children are virtuous in every detail to those who are more skeptical. In actuality, child testimony falls somewhere in between the two divergent views. Though children may not intend to intentionally distort the truth, they do seem to be very vulnerable to suggestibility. Therefore, certain comments and the form of questions can influence testimonials.
Valentine, T., & Maras, K. (2011). The effect of cross-examination on the accuracy of adult eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 554-561. doi: 10.1002/acp.1768
In the first part of the test the children who participated in the study were asked to respond “yes” when they recalled seeing the man visit their school and had to respond “no” to all other questions. On the second part the children were asked to answer “yes” to details they recalled hearing in the post event narrative and “no” to all other things. The results from Memon, Holliday, Hill (2006) indicated that the child would decline negative misinformation more than those who were given positive misinformation.
According to our text, there are three stages of memory; Encoding, storage and retrieval. Encoding is the acquirement of information. Many aspects of stimulus, such as complexity, stressfulness, and briefness can affect the encoding process. Contrary to belief, stressfulness does not necessarily increase or enhance the encoding of an event. The teenagers in the Carrillo case would have most definitely been under tremendous amount of stress. Estimator values such as extreme stress and the weapon focus effect limited the boys' ability to process all the stimuli taking place. Seeing the gun drew their attention away from other aspects of the event, and limited their attention to other pieces of information, such as physical characteristics of the perpetrator. The second step of memory or storage of stimulus can be affected as well. Our text
For example, the old man that lived beneath the boy and his father testified that he heard a fight between the boy and the father and heard the boy yell, “I’m gonna kill you,” along with a body hitting the ground, and then claims that he saw the boy running down the stairs. With this information, along with other powerful eyewitness testimonies, all but one of the jury members believed this boy was guilty. The power of eyewitness testimony is also shown in Loftus’s (1974) study. In this study, Loftus (1974) found that those who claimed to “see” something were usually believed even when their testimony is pointless. She discovered in her study that only 18 percent of people convicted if there was no eyewitness testimony, 72 percent of people convicted when someone declared, “That’s the one!”, and even when the witness only had 20/400 vision and was not wearing glasses and claimed “That’s the one!”, 68 percent of people still convicted the person. This proves that in 12 Angry Men and Loftus (1974) study, eyewitness testimony is very powerful and influential in one’s decision to convict a
Every day a child is called on to testify in a courtroom. Children who have to testify in open court are easily influenced by outside sources. This paper will show the reasons children should not be used as witnesses in a courtroom. I will show all the different influences that a child receives and prove them uncredible. The interview process can influence a child greatly. Ceci and Bruck (1995) found a study that shows that child witnesses may be questioned up to12 times during the course of an investigation. The questioning process can take up to a year and a half to be completed. Children are not capable of remembering exact details for that period. Their answers to questions will change each time he or she is asked. This is because they do not retain information in the same way as an adult. Most studies have shown that children start to lose their ability to recall an event accurately only 10 days after the original event has happened. Another factor in a child’s ability to recall an event is stress. A child can go into a shock stage and repress all memories of what has happened to them. These memories may not resurface for many years. This affects a child’s ability to identify the suspect in photo and live line-ups. The amount of stress a child goes through affects their ability to answer questions in an interview, if they cannot remember what has happened, how are they supposed to answer the myriad of questions the interviewer will ask them.
Lyon, T. D., Scurich, N., Choi, K., Handmaker, S., & Blank, R. (2012). "how did you feel?": Increasing child sexual abuse witnesses' production of evaluative information. Law and Human Behavior, 36(5), 448-457.
Evidence provided in many courtroom cases can range from DNA samples, eyewitness testimony and video-recordings, to name a few. What happens when one of the main sources of information in a case comes from a child? Even worse, what if the child is the victim in the case? The topic of children participating and providing testimony in courtroom settings is an image that, presumably, most would not associate as a “usual” place for children. Yet in cases such as sexual abuse or violence towards a child or within the child’s family, it is not impossible to have cases where children are the predominant source of information provided for judges and jurors. Ref It is then important to consider the reliability of children’s testimonial accounts much like how adult testimonies are examined. The question of focus is then, to what extent can we rely on child eyewitnesses? Specifically, what factors influence the veracity of their testimonies?
Children’s memories are easier to confuse as those of adults. For many years most adults believed that children’s memories could not be trusted because children tend to confuse reality with their fantasies. Children just as adults can be accurate in what they report and they also like adult can distort, forget, fantasize, and be misled. As research show, their memories processes are only human. All I know is that I wouldn’t like to be accused by a group of children or students. It’s not quite as reliable as you may have hoped a memory would be.
Children who have been victims of crime will suffer the same reactions as adults, but they may have other reactions such as bedwetting, withdrawal, stuttering, or not talking and may even become very clingy. As a way of taking control back, older children may consider revenge
According to Sternberg (1999), memory is the extraction of past experiences for information to be used in the present. The retrieval of memory is essential in every aspect of daily life, whether it is for academics, work or social purposes. However, many often take memory for granted and assume that it can be relied on because of how realistic it appears in the mind. This form of memory is also known as flashbulb memory. (Brown and Kulik, 1977). The question of whether our memory is reliably accurate has been shown to have implications in providing precise details of past events. (The British Psychological Association, 2011). In this essay, I would put forth arguments that human memory, in fact, is not completely reliable in providing accurate depictions of our past experiences. Evidence can be seen in the following two studies that support these arguments by examining episodic memory in humans. The first study is by Loftus and Pickrell (1995) who found that memory can be modified by suggestions. The second study is by Naveh-Benjamin and Craik (1995) who found that there is a predisposition for memory to decline with increasing age.
Eyewitnesses of an event, whether it is traumatic or not, can create false memories and insist a specific event happened when in reality, it did not happen. Their memories are vulnerable to an assortment of errors in remembering precise details and their memories can be manipulated, causing a distorted occurrence that on no occasion happened. After reading three research papers on memory blindness with eyewitnesses, it has been proven that eyewitness accounts are not completely accurate and also shows how attributions, choice blindness, and certain circumstances play a role when they are asked to recall the event.
Representative studies including Loftus’s weapon effect study showed how attention has affected reliability. On the same token, research on the role of stress and emotion on eyewitness testimony provides additional information about the settings in which eyewitness testimony may be expected to be unreliable. Ultimately, we should be conscious on how our schemas work, as it can distort our memory through generalization and misinterpretation. All in all, schemas play a role in filling the big picture, but not the details, suggesting us to carefully monitor the details in what we expect, assume and