NCJ Number
195474
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 26 Issue: 3 Dated: June 2002 Pages: 261-283
Date Published
2002
Length
23 pages
Annotation
Criteria-based content analysis (CBCA) scores were examined as they were impacted by veracity, age, status, coaching, and social skills.
Abstract
Criteria-based content analysis (CBCA) scores were examined as they were impacted by veracity, age, status, coaching, and social skills, four aspects not previously studied elsewhere. CBCA is a systematic assessment of the credibility of written statements. It was predicted that truth tellers would have a much higher score than liars for both adults and children, with truth-telling adults being the highest scorers. Participants were divided into four age groups, 5-6, 10-11, 14-15, and undergraduates. They all participated in a real life rub-the-blackboard event set in either a school or a student union, respectively. Some were instructed on CBCA criteria before the interview, while others were not. Rewards were promised to credible witnesses and threats promised to witnesses who were perceived to be not credible. Coaching was either light or heavy and participants were divided into truthful witness, truthful suspect, fabricating suspect, and fabricating witness groups, though 5- to 6-year-olds were not assigned to the heavy coaching and suspect groups. All participants were later interviewed about the event, being accused of either witnessing the event or having participated in the event of blackboard rubbing. It was found conclusively that CBCA scores correlated directly with both social skills and the extent of coaching or knowledge about CBCA of liars. As a result, the validity of the CBCA Checklist, which does not include social skills, is not conclusively demonstrated. It is further suggested by the authors that Statement Validity Assessment (SVA) experts will want to take into account the influence of coaching on CBCA score results. Tables, references