Mock-juror reactions to multiple interview presentation and rapport-building

Abstract

In the UK and some US states, video-recorded investigative interviews of child victims/witnesses can be presented in court as the child’s evidence-in-chief. However, there is scarce advice or research on the effect that presenting different sections of the interviews may have on juror perceptions of the child’s testimony. Two aspects of testimony presentation are examined here: first, whether to show the rapport-building phase of the interview, and second, the presentation of multiple interviews (i.e. more than one interview with the same child). Participants (n = 103) informed they were watching two interviews of the same child separated by a week had more positive perceptions of the child’s testimony than those informed they were watching just one extended interview with a ten-minute break. Also, those watching the rapport-building phase had less positive perceptions of the child’s testimony than those who did not watch this phase. Participants’ perceptions of the interviewer and their case progression decisions were mainly not related to the above presentational differences. Thus, (i) mock-jurors were not inherently biased against multiple interviews and (ii) decisions regarding whether or not to show the rapport-building phase in court may have significant effects on jurors’ perceptions of the child and their testimony.