CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Deception detection and forensic psychologyLegal and Social Justice StudiesLegal processes and jurisprudence

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interviews of Children in a Portuguese Special Judicial Procedure

Open access
Peixoto, Carlos Eduardo, Fernandes, Raquel Veludo, Almeida, Telma Sousa, Silva, Júlia Marina, La Rooy, David, Ribeiro, Catarina, Magalhães, Teresa, Lamb, Michael E.·2017·Behavioral Sciences & the Law
DOI 10.1002/bsl.2284
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Since 2007, alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Portugal have provided evidence in a mandatory “Declarações para Memória Futura” (DMF; English transl. ‘Statement for future use’) proceeding. In order to protect children from having to testify in court, interviews conducted at the DMF can be used later as trial evidence because the hearings are conducted by judges. The present study examined 137 interviews with 3‐ to 17‐year‐olds conducted in several Portuguese criminal courts. Detailed examination of interview transcripts showed that 69% of all questions asked were option‐posing questions, 16% were directive questions, 11% were suggestive questions, and only 3% were open‐ended prompts. The vast majority of details provided by children were thus obtained using the risky recognition‐based prompts (i.e., option posing and suggestive questions) associated with the risks of contaminating and limiting children's informativeness, both potential threats to the credibility of their testimony. There is an urgent need to address this issue and consider the implementation of a scientifically validated structured interview protocol in Portugal. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bsl.2284

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Efforts have been observed in the development of investigative protocols for collecting and evaluating reports of children, as this is often the only evidence.

    “Efforts have been observed in the development of investigative protocols for collecting and evaluating reports of children, as this is often the only evidence (Peixoto, 2012;Peixoto et al., 2017).”

    From Psychological and Behavioral Indicators in the Forensic Assessment of Child Sexual Abuse (2018) · cites this paper as Peixoto et al., 2017

    The Abstract says investigative guidelines and protocols have been developed to elicit reliable information from children, and the Conclusion recommends a structured interview protocol. The cited paper does not say that children's reports are often the only evidence; its discussion of physical evidence in the Portuguese judicial context (p. 192) does not establish that point. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Without the report of the child or other physical and/or biological evidence, nothing can be affirmed regarding the occurrence or not of the abusive situation.

    “without the report of the child or other physical and/or biological evidence nothing can be affi rmed regarding the occurrence or not of the abusive situation (Peixoto, 2012;Peixoto et al., 2017;Pelisoli et al., 2016).”

    From Psychological and Behavioral Indicators in the Forensic Assessment of Child Sexual Abuse (2018) · cites this paper as Peixoto et al., 2017

    The judicial-context section (p. 192) says children may be interviewed even when strong physical evidence exists. The Discussion explains how questioning affects children's accounts, but neither passage says that the absence of a child's report and physical or biological evidence prevents a conclusion about whether abuse occurred. Searches for that assertion and for physical and biological evidence found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. 10.1002/acp.3103 · DOI
  2. 10.1002/acp.3286 · DOI
  3. Associação Portuguesa de Apoio à Vítima (APAV), 2002, Manual Core para atendimento de crianças vítimas de violência sexual
  4. 10.1037/a0035143 · DOI
  5. 10.1111/cdep.12142 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/cdev.12364 · DOI
  7. Caridade S., 2011, Manual de psicologia forense: Contextos, práticas e desafios, 65
  8. 10.1037/10180-000 · DOI
  9. 10.1037/0096-3445.116.1.38 · DOI
  10. Comissão Nacional de Protecção de Crianças e Jovens em Risco [CNPCJR], 2011, Guia de Orientações para os Profissionais das Forças de Segurança na Abordagem de Situações de Maus Tratos
  11. Comissão Nacional de Protecção de Crianças e Jovens em Risco (CNPCJR), 2011, Guia de Orientações para os Profissionais da Acção Social na Abordagem de Situações de Maus Tratos ou Outras Situações de Perigo
  12. Davies E., 2010, Facilitating children to give best evidence: Are there better ways to challenge children's testimony, Criminal Law Journal, 34, 347
  13. 10.1080/13218719809524919 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/j.2044‐8260.1986.tb00666.x · DOI
  15. 10.1111/j.2044‐8260.1979.tb00302.x · DOI
  16. 10.1037/h0093957 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.09.019 · DOI
  18. 10.1080/13218719.2011.615813 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/j.2044-8333.1997.tb00341.x · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.09.005 · DOI
  21. 10.1111/j.1467‐8624.2011.01704.x · DOI
  22. Home Office, 2011, Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and using special measures
  23. 10.1007/BF01499378 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/acp.2951 · DOI
  25. 10.1002/acp.3048 · DOI
  26. 10.1002/acp.726 · DOI
  27. 10.1002/9781119998495 · DOI
  28. 10.1080/016502596385721 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/9780470773291 · DOI
  30. 10.1111/1467‐8624.00250 · DOI
  31. 10.1037/0022‐006X.71.5.926 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/S0145‐2134(03)00167‐4 · DOI
  33. 10.1207/S1532480XADS0603_2 · DOI
  34. 10.1108/JCRPP-01-2015-0001 · DOI
  35. 10.1037/0012-1649.31.4.568 · DOI
  36. Machado C., 2002, Violência e vítimas de crime, 40
  37. Machado C., 2005, Avaliação da credibilidade de alegações de abuso sexual: Consensos e controvérsias, Revista "Psicologia Educação e Cultura", 513
  38. Machado C., 2005, Psicologia forense, 207
  39. Machado C., 2011, Manual de psicologia forense: Contextos, práticas e desafios, 91
  40. Magalhães T., 2010, Abuso de Crianças e Jovens: Da suspeita ao diagnóstico, 147
  41. Magalhães T., 2007, A colheita de informação a vítimas de crimes sexuais, Acta Médica Portuguesa, 20, 439
  42. Manita C., 2003, Actas do Encontro Cuidar da Justiça de Crianças e Jovens ‐ A função dos Juízes Sociais, 229
  43. 10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00137-X · DOI
  44. 10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00254-4 · DOI
  45. Peixoto C. E., 2012, Avaliação da credibilidade de alegações de abuso sexual de crianças ‐ uma perspectiva psicológica forense
  46. Peixoto C. E., 2013, O Protocolo de Entrevista Forense do NICHD: contributo na obtenção do testemunho da criança no contexto português, Revista Do Ministério Público, 134, 181
  47. Peixoto C. E., 2015, Contemporary developments and practices in investigative interviewing and interrogation: An international perspective, 188
  48. Peixoto C. E., 2011, Abuse & neglect series: To improve the management of child abuse and neglect, 133
  49. 10.1037/a0030312 · DOI
  50. 10.1037/10301-000 · DOI
  51. 10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.823 · DOI
  52. Ribeiro C., 2009, A criança na justiça: Trajectórias e significados do processo judicial de crianças vítimas de abuso sexual intrafamiliar
  53. 10.1093/med:psych/9780199730896.001.0001 · DOI
  54. Saywitz K. J., 2011, The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment, 337
  55. 10.1080/10683160802409347 · DOI
  56. Spencer J., 2012, Children and Cross‐examination ‐ Time to Change the Rules?
  57. 10.1002/9781119998495.ch11 · DOI
  58. 10.1037/a0035000 · DOI
  59. 10.1002/acp.741 · DOI
  60. 10.1348/0261510041552710 · DOI
  61. 10.1002/9780470713679 · DOI
  62. 10.1375/pplt.2003.10.1.199 · DOI · Paper page
  63. 10.1037/1076‐898X.9.3.187 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Psychological and Behavioral Indicators in the Forensic Assessment of Child Sexual Abuse

    Schaefer, L. S., Brunnet, A. E., Lobo, B. O. M., Carvalho, J. C. N., & Kristensen, C. H. (2018) · Temas em Psicologia · doi:10.9788/tp2018.3-12en · Cited by 3

    “In this context, establishing the causal link between the alleged situation and the symptomatology manifested is an important and diffi cult task, as without the report of the child or other physical and/or biological evidence nothing can be affi rmed regarding the occurrence or not of the abusive situation (Peixoto,…”
    BackgroundMethod

Metadata

Authors
Peixoto, C. E., Fernandes, R. V., Almeida, T. S., Silva, J. M., La Rooy, D., Ribeiro, C., Magalhães, T., & Lamb, M. E.
Affiliations
  • National Legal Medicine Institute (PT)
  • Portuguese National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, I. P. ‐ Northern Branch Porto Portugal
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Royal Holloway University of London London UK
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
Corresponding author
Peixoto, Carlos Eduardo
ORCID
Venue
Behavioral Sciences & the Law
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-03-29
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
189-203
ISSN
  • 0735-3936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0798
DOI
10.1002/bsl.2284
OpenAlex
W2599788774
Cited by
12
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Behavioral Sciences & the Law (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (PTDC/MHC‐PAP/4295/2012)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal and Social Justice Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
Keywords
child sexual abuse, child witnesses, suggestive questioning, child sexual abuse victims, Portugal
MeSH terms
Child, Child Abuse, Sexual, Criminal Law, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Crime Victims

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review