Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 187–197 | Cite as

Detecting Deception in Children: An Experimental Study of the Effect of Event Familiarity on CBCA Ratings

  • Iris Blandon-Gitlin
  • Kathy Pezdek
  • Martha Rogers
  • Laura Brodie


The CBCA is the most commonly used deception detection technique worldwide. Pezdek et al. (2004) used a quasi-experimental design to assess children’s accounts of a traumatic medical procedure; CBCA ratings were higher for descriptions of familiar than unfamiliar events. This study tested this effect using an experimental design and assessed the joint effect of familiarity and veracity on CBCA ratings. Children described a true or a fabricated event. Half described a familiar event; half described an unfamiliar event. Two CBCA-trained judges rated transcripts of the descriptions. CBCA scores were more strongly influenced by the familiarity than the actual veracity of the event, and CBCA scores were significantly correlated with age. CBCA results were compared with results from other measures. Together with the results of K. Pezdek et al. (2004) these findings suggest that in its current form, CBCA is of limited utility as a credibility assessment tool.


credibility deception in children child sexual abuse 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boychuk, T. D. (1991). Criteria-based content analysis of children’s statements about sexual abuse: A field-based validation study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
  2. Buck, J. A., Warren, A. R., Betman, S. I., & Brigham (2002). Age differences in criteria-based content analyses scores in typical sexual abuse interviews. Applied Developmental Psychology, 23, 267–283.Google Scholar
  3. Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1993). The suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403–439.Google Scholar
  4. Craig, R. A., Scheibe, R., Raskin, D. C., Kircher, J. C., & Dodd, D. (1999). Interviewer questions and content analysis of children’s statements of sexual abuse. Applied Developmental Science, 3, 77–85.Google Scholar
  5. Kohnken, G., Schimossek, E., Aschermann, E., & Hofer, E. (1995). The cognitive interview and the assessment of the credibility of adults’ statements. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 671–684.Google Scholar
  6. Lamb, M. E., Sternberg, K. J., Esplin, P. W., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Hovav, M. (1997). Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A field validation study. Child Abuse and Neglect, 21, 255–264.Google Scholar
  7. Lamers-Winkelman, F., & Buffing, F. (1996). Children’s testimony in the Netherlands: A study of statement validity analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 304–321.Google Scholar
  8. Landry, K. L., & Brigham, J. C. (1992). The effect of training in criteria-content analysis on the ability to detect deception in adults. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 663–676.Google Scholar
  9. Pezdek, K., Finger, K., & Hodge, D. (1997). Planting false childhood memories: The role of event plausibility. Psychological Science, 8, 437–441.Google Scholar
  10. Pezdek, K., & Hodge, D. (1999). Planting childhood memories in children: The role of event plausibility. Child Development, 70, 887–895.Google Scholar
  11. Pezdek, K., Morrow, A., Blandon-Gitlin, I., Goodman, G. S., Quas, J. A., Saywitz, K. J., et al. (2004). Detecting deception in children: Event familiarity affects Criterion-Based Content Analysis ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 119–126.Google Scholar
  12. Pezdek, K., & Taylor, J. (2000). Discriminating between accounts of true and false events. In D. F. Bjorklund (Ed.), Research and theory in false-memory creation in children and adults. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Raskin, D. C., & Esplin, P. W. (1991a). Statement Validity Assessment: Interview procedures and content analysis of children’s statements of sexual abuse. Behavioral Assessment, 12, 265–291.Google Scholar
  14. Raskin, D. C., & Esplin, P. W. (1991b). Assessment of children’s statements of sexual abuse. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children’s recollections (pp. 153–164). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  15. Sedlak, A. J., & Broadhurst, D. D. (1996). Third national incidence study of child abuse and neglect: Final report. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Resources, Administration for Children and Families.Google Scholar
  16. Steller, M. (1989). Recent developments in statement analysis. In J. C. Yuille (Ed.), Credibility assessment (pp. 135–154). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  17. Tye, M. J. C., Amato, S. L., Honts, C. R., Devitt, M. K., & Peters, D. (1999). The willingness of children to lie and the assessment of credibility in an ecologically relevant laboratory setting. Applied Developmental Science, 3, 92–109.Google Scholar
  18. Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., & Bull, R. (2002). Will the truth come out? The effect of deception, age, status, coaching, and social skills on CBCA scores. Law and Human Behavior, 26(3), 261–283.Google Scholar
  19. Yuille, J. C. (1988). The systematic assessment of children’s testimony. Canadian Psychology, 29, 247–262.Google Scholar
  20. Zaparniuk, J., Yuille, J. C., & Taylor, S. (1995). Assessing the credibility of true and false statements. International Journal of Law Psychiatry, 18, 343–352.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Iris Blandon-Gitlin
    • 1
    • 3
  • Kathy Pezdek
    • 1
  • Martha Rogers
    • 2
  • Laura Brodie
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyClaremont Graduate UniversityClaremont
  2. 2.Tustin
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyClaremont Graduate UniversityClaremont

Personalised recommendations