CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Warren KL, Peterson C, Gillingham CC. Psychiatry Psychol. Law. 2018; 25(5): 789-805. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2018, Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
In this study, the usefulness of linguistic analysis in determining the veracity of children's accounts is examined. The Linguistic Inquiry Word Count 2007 program was used to analyze 95 stories told by 5- to 14-year-olds who were telling the truth or a lie about the stressful experience of breaking a bone or requiring sutures for serious lacerations. Half of the children were coached by parents in preparing their story over the four days prior to giving their account. Differences emerged in the linguistic style used as a function of age, presence of coaching and event veracity. Very few linguistic categories emerged as significant predictors of event veracity, and the variables that did emerge were different depending upon the presence of coaching. Since in real-life situations one seldom knows a child's coaching history, these findings suggest that it is inappropriate to use linguistic analysis to assess the veracity of children's accounts. Language: en |
|
Keywords |
child; coaching; deception; LIWC; parent; veracity |