Children’s Reports of Pleasant and Unpleasant Events

  • Maggie Bruck
  • Helene Hembrooke
  • Stephen Ceci
  • Rachel Yehuda
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSA, volume 291)

Abstract

In the past decade, there has been an exponential increase in research on the accuracy of young children’s memories and the degree to which young children’s memories and reports can be molded by suggestions implanted by adult interviewers. Several important findings have emerged from this research. On the one hand, the results of a number of studies of children’s autobiographical recall or memory for events indicate that children’s recall is at times highly accurate and at times quite detailed about a large range of events (e.g., Baker-Ward, Gordon, Ornstein, Larus, & Clubb, 1993; Parker, Bahrick, Lundy, Fivush, & Levitt, in press; poster abstract this volume; Peterson & Bell, 1996). On the other hand there are also a number of studies that highlight the weaknesses of young children’s reports of past events when they are interviewed under certain conditions; of particular interest is the suggestibility of children. Until recently, most suggestibility studies examined the influence of a single misleading suggestion on children’s recall of an event. Generally, these studies indicated that in a variety of conditions young children are more suggestible than adults with preschoolers being more vulnerable than any other age group (see Ceci & Bruck, 1993, for a review of this literature).

Keywords

Child Sexual Abuse False Memory Unpleasant Event Suggestive Technique False Event 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker-Ward, L., Gordon, B., Ornstein, P. A., Larus, D., & Clubb, P. (1993). Young children’s long-term retention of a pediatric examination. Child Development, 64, 1519–1533.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruck, M., Ceci, S.J., Francoeur, E., & Barr. R.J. (1995). “I hardly cried when I got my shot!”: Influencing children’s reports about a visit to their pediatrician. Child Development, 66, 193–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruck, M. Ceci, S.J., Francoeur, E., & Renick, A. (1995). Anatomically detailed dolls do not facilitate preschoolers’ reports of a pediatric examination involving genital touching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruck, M., Ceci, S.J., Hembrooke, H. (1995). Effects of interviewing procedures on children’s narratives for true and false events. Society for Research on Child Development, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  5. Ceci, S. J. & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of of children’s testimony. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ceci, S.J., Crotteau-Huffman, M., Smith, E., & Loftus, E.F. (1994). Repeatedly thinking about non-events. Consciousness & Cognition, 3, 388–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ceci, S.J., Loftus, E.F., Leichtman, M. & Bruck, M. (1994). The role of source misattributions in the creation of false beliefs among preschoolers. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 62, 304–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conte, J. R., Sorenson, E., Fogarty, L., & Rosa, J. D. (1991). Evaluating children’s reports of sexual abuse: Results from a survey of professionals. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78, 428–437.Google Scholar
  9. Fivush, R., Haden, C., Adam, S. (1995). Structure and coherences of preschoolers’ personal narratives over time: Implications for childhood amnesia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60, 32–56.Google Scholar
  10. Leichtman, M. D., & Ceci, S. J. (1995). The effects of stereotypes and suggestions on preschoolers’ reports. Developmental Psychology, 31,: 568–578Google Scholar
  11. Leippe, M., Manion, A., & Romanczyk, A. (1993). Discernability or discrimination? Understanding jurors’ reactions to accurate and inaccurate child and adult eyewitnesses In G. Goodman and B. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony (pp. 169–201 ). Guilford Press: New York.Google Scholar
  12. Parker, J., Bahrick, L., Lundy, B., Fivush., & Levitt, M. (In press). Effects of stress on children’s memory for a natural disaster. In C. P. Thompson, D. J. Herrmann, J. D. Read, D. Bruce, D. G. Payne, and M. P. Toglia. (eds.) Eyewitness memory: Theoretical and applied perspectives. ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  13. Peterson, C., & Bell, M. (1996). Children’s memory for traumatic injury. Child Development, 67, 3045–3070.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Horner, T. M., Guyer, M., J., & Kalter, N. M. (1993a). Clinical expertise and the assessment of child sexual abuse. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 32, 925–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Homer, T. M., Guyer, M., J., & Kalter, N. M. (1993b). The biases of child sexual abuse experts: Believing is seeing. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 21, 281–292.Google Scholar
  16. Huffman, M.L., Crossman, A.M., & Ceci, S.J. (in press). Are false memories permanent? An investigation of the long-term effects of source misattributions. Consciousnesss and Cognition.Google Scholar
  17. Realmuto, G., Jensen, J., & Wescoe, S. (1990). Specificity and sensitivity of sexually anatomically correct dolls in substantiating abuse: A pilot study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 743–746.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maggie Bruck
    • 1
  • Helene Hembrooke
    • 2
  • Stephen Ceci
    • 2
  • Rachel Yehuda
    • 3
  1. 1.McGill UniversityMontrealUSA
  2. 2.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.The Mount Sinai School of MedicineUSA

Personalised recommendations