The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation

Child sexual abuse (CSA) cases involving recantation invoke concerns about children’s reliability. Expert testimony can help explain the complexities of these cases. Experts have historically relied on Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS), yet this is not science-based. In a CSA case in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Emily Denne, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Tess M. S. Neal
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8341590/?tool=EBI
id doaj-a9c25afd64b74372a18e04e548f13168
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a9c25afd64b74372a18e04e548f131682021-08-08T04:31:21ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032021-01-01168The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantationEmily DenneStacia N. StolzenbergTess M. S. NealChild sexual abuse (CSA) cases involving recantation invoke concerns about children’s reliability. Expert testimony can help explain the complexities of these cases. Experts have historically relied on Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS), yet this is not science-based. In a CSA case involving recantation, how would evidence-based testimony affect perceptions of child credibility when compared to CSAAS? Across 2 studies, we test the effects of expert testimony based on evidence-based science, nonscientific evidence, and experience-based evidence on outcomes in CSA cases involving recantation. Evidence-based testimony led to higher perceptions of credibility and scientific rigor of the evidence when compared to CSAAS testimony. Evidence-based testimony also led to more guilty verdicts when compared to the control. In sum, jurors had some ability to detect evidence strength, such that evidence-based expert testimony was superior to CSAAS testimony in many respects, and consistently superior to experience-based testimony in these cases.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8341590/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Emily Denne
Stacia N. Stolzenberg
Tess M. S. Neal
spellingShingle Emily Denne
Stacia N. Stolzenberg
Tess M. S. Neal
The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
PLoS ONE
author_facet Emily Denne
Stacia N. Stolzenberg
Tess M. S. Neal
author_sort Emily Denne
title The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
title_short The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
title_full The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
title_fullStr The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
title_full_unstemmed The effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
title_sort effects of evidence-based expert testimony on perceptions of child sexual abuse involving recantation
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2021-01-01
description Child sexual abuse (CSA) cases involving recantation invoke concerns about children’s reliability. Expert testimony can help explain the complexities of these cases. Experts have historically relied on Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS), yet this is not science-based. In a CSA case involving recantation, how would evidence-based testimony affect perceptions of child credibility when compared to CSAAS? Across 2 studies, we test the effects of expert testimony based on evidence-based science, nonscientific evidence, and experience-based evidence on outcomes in CSA cases involving recantation. Evidence-based testimony led to higher perceptions of credibility and scientific rigor of the evidence when compared to CSAAS testimony. Evidence-based testimony also led to more guilty verdicts when compared to the control. In sum, jurors had some ability to detect evidence strength, such that evidence-based expert testimony was superior to CSAAS testimony in many respects, and consistently superior to experience-based testimony in these cases.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8341590/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT emilydenne theeffectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
AT stacianstolzenberg theeffectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
AT tessmsneal theeffectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
AT emilydenne effectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
AT stacianstolzenberg effectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
AT tessmsneal effectsofevidencebasedexperttestimonyonperceptionsofchildsexualabuseinvolvingrecantation
_version_ 1721216616848424960