Nonbelieved memories in the false memory archive

The False Memory Archive is a unique art collection containing hundreds of false memory reports submitted by members of the general population. The current study aimed to analyse these reports. Specifically, we examined whether some of the memories reported in these submissions were better described as nonbelieved memories (NBMs). Furthermore, we investigated the reasons for why people decided that their memory was false and assessed the verification strategies that people used to validate their mental representation. Five hundred submissions were coded and more than half (53.4%) met the criteria for NBMs. Social feedback was the most frequently reported reason for reducing belief and asking family members was the most frequently mentioned memory verification strategy. Reports categorized as NBMs were more likely to include mention of memory verification strategies than were believed memories

International researchers and child protection service workers beliefs about child sexual abuse disclosure and statement validity

How child victims of sexual abuse disclose their experiences is contested among experts. We surveyed international researchers (N = 199) and child protection service workers (N = 267) on their beliefs regarding how victims of child sexual abuse cope with and disclose their experiences, and how these disclosure patterns affect the validity of statements given by maltreated children. We found some points of disagreement among experts related to, for example, recantation and denial frequency. However, there were also certain points of agreement such as that children often delay disclosure, and that false denials can affect statement validity (i.e. the accuracy and truthfulness of a statement) negatively. However, the majority of both expert groups agreed that statements made after denial or recantations should be admissible as evidence in court. Expert witnesses could take areas of agreement into account when giving testimony in child sexual abuse cases

Similar rates of denial in NICHD and control interviews with alleged child abuse victims in the Netherlands

Purpose In the current study, we investigated whether denial and avoidance rates differed statistically significantly based on the interview protocol used. Method We examined 38 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) interview transcripts, and 30 control transcripts from interviews from an earlier study (Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2022, 36, 7) conducted with alleged child victims of abuse at Dutch child protection services. Results We detected 57 denial and 282 avoidance statements across the 68 interviews. No statistically significant differences emerged between (1) the proportion of denials using NICHD (42%, n = 16/38) and control interviews (30%, n = 9/30), and (2) the average number of denial statements between NICHD (M = 0.84) and control interviews (M = 0.83). Furthermore, denials (and avoidances) were not more or less likely to occur in response to certain types of questions, even though the majority of denials in our sample occurred in response to option-posing questions (60%, n = 34/57). Denials did occur statistically significantly less often within the first half of the individual interviews in NICHD than in control interviews. Conclusions Our findings call attention to the difficulties child protection services face in investigative interviews with alleged child victims