13-05-2017 | Original Paper | Uitgave 8/2017 Open Access

Verbal, Visual, and Intermediary Support for Child Witnesses with Autism During Investigative Interviews
- Tijdschrift:
- Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders > Uitgave 8/2017
Introduction
Verbal Labels
Sketch Reinstatement of Context (Sketch-RC)
Registered Intermediaries
Method
Participants
Variables
|
Best-practice (n = 18)
|
Verbal labels (n = 18)
|
Sketch-RC (n = 18)
|
Registered intermediary (n = 17)
|
Group differences
(in bold)
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age
|
9 years 9 months (19 m)
|
8 years 11 months (17 m)
|
8 years 11 months (19 m)
|
9 years 7 m (14 m)
|
F(3,67) = 1.59,
p = .20
|
WASI-II
a
|
94.4 (14.2)
|
102.8 (12.9)
|
100.4 (14.2)
|
93.4 (20.0)
|
F(3,67) = 1.53,
p = .22
|
TOMAL2 composite
a
|
97.1 (17.7)
|
100.3 (16.0)
|
95.4 (20.4)
|
88.7 (25.1)
|
F(3,64) = 0.97,
p = .41
|
TOMAL2 Verbal
a
|
100.5 (19.8)
|
107.0 (21.9)
|
105.8 (15.8)
|
90.8 (26.6)
|
F(3,65) = 2.05,
p = .12
|
TOMAL2 Non-verbal
a
|
94.7 (17.8)
|
93.9 (12.6)
|
86.2 (25.7)
|
89.9 (18.7)
|
F(3,64) = 0.71,
p = .55
|
BPVS-3
a
|
76.5 (8.2)
|
87.3 (16.0)
|
91.9 (16.4)
|
84.3 (19.4)
|
*
F
(3,67) =
3.16,
p = .
03
SRC >
BP
|
ELT-2 sequencing
a
|
101.7 (13.8)
|
102.6 (16.1)
|
104.8 (8.5)
|
93.1 (16.5)
|
F(3,65) = 2.23,
p = .09
|
ELT-2 grammar & syntax
a
|
96.7 (11.6)
|
101.1 (17.0)
|
96.3 (14.0)
|
90.5 (12.8)
|
F(3,60) = 1.43,
p = .24
|
CELF-4 recalling sentences
b
|
6.4 (3.1)
|
8.8 (4.7)
|
8.2 (3.3)
|
5.4 (4.1)
|
*
F
(3,65) =
2.80,
p = .
047
No sig. diffs
c
|
CELF-4 formulated sentences
b
|
5.7 (3.0)
|
5.9 (3.8)
|
5.4 (3.4)
|
4.3 (3.2)
|
F(3,62) = 0.71,
p = .55
|
TEA-Ch sky search
b
|
9.1 (3.5)
|
7.1 (3.6)
|
8.2 (3.8)
|
7.7 (4.4)
|
F(3,66) = 0.83,
p = .48
|
TEA-Ch Score!
b
|
7.3 (4.9)
|
8.5 (3.7)
|
7.9 (4.3)
|
6.5 (3.5)
|
F(3,66) = 0.76,
p = .52
|
TEA-Ch Dual Task
b
|
3.4 (2.9)
|
7.3 (3.7)
|
3.8 (3.4)
|
2.6 (3.3)
|
**
F
(3,65) =
6.68,
p = .
001
VL >
BP =
SRC =
RI
|
Brief Interview total correct
|
23.0 (11.4)
|
23.5 (11.9)
|
28.2 (20.1)
|
22.2 (15.9)
|
F(3,67) = 0.55,
p = .65
|
Variables
|
Best-practice (n = 75)
|
Verbal labels (n = 44)
|
Sketch-RC (n = 42)
|
Registered intermediary (n = 38)
|
Group differences (in bold)
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age
|
8 years 8 months (14 m)
|
8 years 4 months (13 m)
|
8 years 3 months (15 m)
|
9 years 2 months (16 m)
|
*
F(
3,195) =
5.04,
p =
.002
RI >
VL,
RI >
SRC
|
WASI-II
a
|
108.7 (13.7)
|
105.8 (12.0)
|
109.5 (13.5)
|
102.5 (14.3)
|
F(3,195) = 2.42,
p = .07
|
TOMAL2 composite
a
|
112.8 (15.9)
|
112.3 (13.8)
|
112.0 (12.6)
|
110.1 (16.4)
|
F(3,195) = 0.29,
p = .83
|
TOMAL2 verbal
a
|
113.2 (16.9)
|
113.6 (14.7)
|
111.0 (13.8)
|
106.5 (16.6)
|
F(3,195) = 1.82,
p = .15
|
TOMAL2 non-verbal
a
|
109.5 (17.6)
|
108.1 (15.6)
|
110.2 (14.9)
|
111.6 (20.0)
|
F(3,195) = 0.30,
p = .83
|
BPVS-3
a
|
94.4 (13.4)
|
93.9 (12.9)
|
94.6 (13.9)
|
87.9 (14.9)
|
F(3,195) = 2.26,
p = .08
|
ELT-2 sequencing
a
|
109.4 (9.1)
|
107.5 (9.2)
|
111.6 (8.5)
|
109.4 (6.5)
|
F(3,195) = 1.73,
p = .17
|
ELT-2 grammar & syntax
a
|
106.6 (10.7)
|
106.5 (10.3)
|
108.6 (9.1)
|
103.7 (10.8)
|
F(3,194) = 1.53,
p = .21
|
CELF-4 recalling sentences
b
|
10.4 (3.2)
|
11.6 (2.3)
|
11.2 (2.9)
|
10.8 (3.1)
|
F(3,195) = 1.80,
p = .15
|
CELF-4 Formulated sentences
b
|
9.3 (3.3)
|
10.1 (2.9)
|
10.5 (2.8)
|
9.1 (3.2)
|
F(3,195) = 2.12,
p = .10
|
TEA-Ch sky search
b
|
9.5 (2.5)
|
9.0 (2.8)
|
9.0 (2.7)
|
9.2 (3.3)
|
F(3,195) = 0.35,
p = .79
|
TEA-Ch score!
b
|
9.0 (3.4)
|
9.1 (3.4)
|
9.3 (3.8)
|
9.3 (3.6)
|
F(3,195) = 0.10,
p = .96
|
TEA-Ch dual task
b
|
6.6 (3.7)
|
6.6 (3.6)
|
6.1 (3.8)
|
5.4 (3.6)
|
F(3,195) = 1.10,
p = .35
|
Brief interview total correct
|
32.2 (15.4)
|
35.4 (14.2)
|
32.9 (15.9)
|
41.6 (12.6)
|
*
F
(3,195) =
3.68,
p =
.013
RI >
BP
|
Materials and Procedure
Phase 1: Staged Event and Evidence Gathering Statements (‘Brief Interviews’)
Phase 2: Investigative Interviews
Control Measures
Intelligence
Language
Memory
Attention
Results
Research Question 1: Did the Interview Interventions Improve Performance in Children with ASD?
Measures
|
Interview condition
|
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Best-practice
|
Verbal labels
|
Sketch-RC
|
Registered intermediary
|
|
Correct details
|
20.06 (15.11)
|
32.00 (16.56)
|
27.17 (24.11)
|
18.47 (16.61)
|
Incorrect details
|
2.67 (2.93)
|
3.11 (3.48)
|
2.17 (2.20)
|
2.82 (3.38)
|
Confabulations
|
1.50 (2.15)
|
3.67 (5.02)
|
3.78 (4.89)
|
1.94 (2.90)
|
Proportion of correct details
|
0.82 (0.12)
|
0.81 (0.16)
|
0.78 (0.20)
|
0.79 (0.20)
|
People
|
7.83 (6.11)
|
11.61 (6.77)
|
8.61 (6.79)
|
6.94 (6.71)
|
Setting
|
1.11 (1.28)
|
2.17 (1.76)
|
1.28 (1.94)
|
0.41 (0.51)
|
Actions
|
4.39 (4.46)
|
6.22 (4.55)
|
5.72 (6.70)
|
3.94 (4.49)
|
Conversation
|
0.50 (0.99)
|
1.94 (2.90)
|
1.44 (2.01)
|
0.88 (1.58)
|
Objects
|
2.83 (2.66)
|
5.22 (4.40)
|
4.89 (4.66)
|
3.65 (3.72)
|
General
|
3.39 (3.98)
|
4.83 (4.03)
|
5.22 (5.40)
|
2.65 (3.46)
|
Investigative interview measures
|
Total R
2 accounted for by the model
|
Change in R
2 at step 2
|
β’s receptive vocabulary
|
β’s best-practice vs. verbal labels
|
β’s Best-practice vs. sketch-RC
|
β’s Best-practice vs. RI
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total correct details
|
0.30***
|
0.05
|
0.50***
|
0.13
|
−0.04
|
−0.14
|
Total incorrect details
|
0.10
|
0.02
|
0.32*
|
−0.05
|
−0.19
|
−0.11
|
Total confabulations
|
0.08
|
0.06
|
0.07
|
0.21
|
0.23
|
0.02
|
Proportion of correct details
|
0.02
|
0.01
|
0.12
|
−0.03
|
−0.09
|
−0.04
|
Summary
Research Question 2: Did the Interview Interventions Improve Performance in TD Children?
Measures
|
Interview condition
|
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Best-practice
|
Verbal labels
|
Sketch-RC
|
Registered intermediary
|
|
Correct details
|
30.04 (18.03)
|
37.59 (15.31)
|
32.40 (19.15)
|
53.92 (18.85)
|
Incorrect details
|
3.35 (2.83)
|
4.18 (3.47)
|
3.48 (2.89)
|
5.47 (3.20)
|
Confabulations
|
2.73 (4.07)
|
5.52 (8.51)
|
5.14 (6.80)
|
3.84 (4.61)
|
Proportion of correct details
|
0.84 (0.10)
|
0.79 (0.18)
|
0.77 (0.18)
|
0.84 (0.11)
|
People
|
10.57 (7.19)
|
11.80 (6.63)
|
9.64 (7.70)
|
18.39 (7.36)
|
Setting
|
1.03 (1.20)
|
2.07 (1.19)
|
1.05 (1.40)
|
1.66 (1.48)
|
Actions
|
5.51 (4.58)
|
6.34 (4.19)
|
5.48 (4.71)
|
10.74 (6.00)
|
Conversation
|
1.27 (1.80)
|
1.07 (1.45)
|
1.12 (2.18)
|
2.29 (2.73)
|
Objects
|
4.71 (3.59)
|
7.66 (3.87)
|
6.52 (4.92)
|
10.29 (5.64)
|
General
|
6.96 (4.66)
|
8.61 (4.76)
|
8.60 (4.05)
|
10.58 (4.59)
|
Investigative interview measures
|
Total R
2 accounted for by the model
|
Change in R
2 at step 2
|
β’s Age
|
β’s brief total correct
|
β’s IQ
|
β’s Best-practice vs. verbal labels
|
β’s Best-practice vs. sketch-RC
|
β’s Best-practice vs. RI
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total correct details
|
0.56***
|
0.11***
|
0.27***
|
0.38***
|
0.18***
|
0.18**
|
0.08
|
0.38***
|
Total incorrect details
|
0.22***
|
0.02
|
0.08
|
0.37***
|
0.00
|
0.07
|
0.02
|
0.16*
|
Total confabulations
|
0.07*
|
0.04*
|
0.20**
|
0.00
|
0.05
|
0.19*
|
0.19*
|
0.07
|
Proportion of correct details
|
0.05
|
0.03
|
−0.07
|
0.08
|
0.09
|
−0.13
|
−0.17*
|
0.02
|