Comfort drawing during investigative interviews

Evidence of the safety of a popular practice

Debra Ann Poole, Jason Dickinson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluated the impact of comfort drawing (allowing children to draw during interviews) on the quality of children's eyewitness reports. Methods: Children (N= 219, 5 to 12 years) who had participated in an earlier memory study returned 1 or 2 years later, experienced a new event, and described these events during phased, investigative-style interviews. Interviewers delivered the same prompts to children in the no drawing and drawing conditions but provided paper and markers in the drawing condition, invited these children to draw, and periodically asked if they would like to make another picture. Results: Most children in the drawing condition were interested in using the materials, and measures of eyewitness performance were sensitive to differences in cognitive ability (i.e., age) and task difficulty (i.e., delay between the remote event and interview). Comfort drawing had no overall impact as evidenced by nonsignificant main effects of condition across 20 performance measures, although more of the younger children reported experienced touching in the drawing than no drawing condition. Conclusions: The children successfully divided attention between voluntary drawing and conversations about past events. Importantly, comfort drawing did not impair the amount of information recalled, the accuracy of children's answers, or even the extent to which interviewers needed to prompt for answers. Due to the large number of analyses, the benefit of drawing for younger, touched children requires replication. Practice Implications: Comfort drawing poses no documented risks for typically-developing school-aged children, but the practice remains untested for younger children and those with cognitive impairments.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)192-201
Number of pages10
JournalChild Abuse and Neglect
Volume38
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014

Fingerprint

Interviews
Safety
Practice (Psychology)
Aptitude

Keywords

  • Children
  • Comfort drawing
  • Eyewitness testimony
  • Investigative interviews

Cite this

@article{05acdb855df74abbb703dc5abd284326,
title = "Comfort drawing during investigative interviews: Evidence of the safety of a popular practice",
abstract = "Objective: This study evaluated the impact of comfort drawing (allowing children to draw during interviews) on the quality of children's eyewitness reports. Methods: Children (N= 219, 5 to 12 years) who had participated in an earlier memory study returned 1 or 2 years later, experienced a new event, and described these events during phased, investigative-style interviews. Interviewers delivered the same prompts to children in the no drawing and drawing conditions but provided paper and markers in the drawing condition, invited these children to draw, and periodically asked if they would like to make another picture. Results: Most children in the drawing condition were interested in using the materials, and measures of eyewitness performance were sensitive to differences in cognitive ability (i.e., age) and task difficulty (i.e., delay between the remote event and interview). Comfort drawing had no overall impact as evidenced by nonsignificant main effects of condition across 20 performance measures, although more of the younger children reported experienced touching in the drawing than no drawing condition. Conclusions: The children successfully divided attention between voluntary drawing and conversations about past events. Importantly, comfort drawing did not impair the amount of information recalled, the accuracy of children's answers, or even the extent to which interviewers needed to prompt for answers. Due to the large number of analyses, the benefit of drawing for younger, touched children requires replication. Practice Implications: Comfort drawing poses no documented risks for typically-developing school-aged children, but the practice remains untested for younger children and those with cognitive impairments.",
keywords = "Children, Comfort drawing, Eyewitness testimony, Investigative interviews",
author = "Poole, {Debra Ann} and Jason Dickinson",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.04.012",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "192--201",
journal = "Child Abuse and Neglect",
issn = "0145-2134",
publisher = "Elsevier Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Comfort drawing during investigative interviews : Evidence of the safety of a popular practice. / Poole, Debra Ann; Dickinson, Jason.

In: Child Abuse and Neglect, Vol. 38, No. 2, 01.01.2014, p. 192-201.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comfort drawing during investigative interviews

T2 - Evidence of the safety of a popular practice

AU - Poole, Debra Ann

AU - Dickinson, Jason

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Objective: This study evaluated the impact of comfort drawing (allowing children to draw during interviews) on the quality of children's eyewitness reports. Methods: Children (N= 219, 5 to 12 years) who had participated in an earlier memory study returned 1 or 2 years later, experienced a new event, and described these events during phased, investigative-style interviews. Interviewers delivered the same prompts to children in the no drawing and drawing conditions but provided paper and markers in the drawing condition, invited these children to draw, and periodically asked if they would like to make another picture. Results: Most children in the drawing condition were interested in using the materials, and measures of eyewitness performance were sensitive to differences in cognitive ability (i.e., age) and task difficulty (i.e., delay between the remote event and interview). Comfort drawing had no overall impact as evidenced by nonsignificant main effects of condition across 20 performance measures, although more of the younger children reported experienced touching in the drawing than no drawing condition. Conclusions: The children successfully divided attention between voluntary drawing and conversations about past events. Importantly, comfort drawing did not impair the amount of information recalled, the accuracy of children's answers, or even the extent to which interviewers needed to prompt for answers. Due to the large number of analyses, the benefit of drawing for younger, touched children requires replication. Practice Implications: Comfort drawing poses no documented risks for typically-developing school-aged children, but the practice remains untested for younger children and those with cognitive impairments.

AB - Objective: This study evaluated the impact of comfort drawing (allowing children to draw during interviews) on the quality of children's eyewitness reports. Methods: Children (N= 219, 5 to 12 years) who had participated in an earlier memory study returned 1 or 2 years later, experienced a new event, and described these events during phased, investigative-style interviews. Interviewers delivered the same prompts to children in the no drawing and drawing conditions but provided paper and markers in the drawing condition, invited these children to draw, and periodically asked if they would like to make another picture. Results: Most children in the drawing condition were interested in using the materials, and measures of eyewitness performance were sensitive to differences in cognitive ability (i.e., age) and task difficulty (i.e., delay between the remote event and interview). Comfort drawing had no overall impact as evidenced by nonsignificant main effects of condition across 20 performance measures, although more of the younger children reported experienced touching in the drawing than no drawing condition. Conclusions: The children successfully divided attention between voluntary drawing and conversations about past events. Importantly, comfort drawing did not impair the amount of information recalled, the accuracy of children's answers, or even the extent to which interviewers needed to prompt for answers. Due to the large number of analyses, the benefit of drawing for younger, touched children requires replication. Practice Implications: Comfort drawing poses no documented risks for typically-developing school-aged children, but the practice remains untested for younger children and those with cognitive impairments.

KW - Children

KW - Comfort drawing

KW - Eyewitness testimony

KW - Investigative interviews

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84896391388&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.04.012

DO - 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.04.012

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 192

EP - 201

JO - Child Abuse and Neglect

JF - Child Abuse and Neglect

SN - 0145-2134

IS - 2

ER -