Advertisement

Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

, Volume 48, Issue 7, pp 2593–2596 | Cite as

No Evidence Against Sketch Reinstatement of Context, Verbal Labels or the Use of Registered Intermediaries for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Response to Henry et al. (2017)

  • Coral J. Dando
  • Thomas C. Ormerod
  • Penny Cooper
  • Ruth Marchant
  • Michelle Mattison
  • Rebecca Milne
  • Ray Bull
Letter to the Editor

Abstract

Recently, Henry et al. (J Autism Dev Disord 8:2348–2362, 2017) found no evidence for the use of Verbal Labels, Sketch Reinstatement of Context and Registered Intermediaries by forensic practitioners when interviewing children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. We consider their claims, noting the limited ecological validity of the experimental paradigm, the impacts of repeated interviewing where retrieval support is not provided at first retrieval, question the interviewer/intermediary training and their population relevant experience, and comment on the suppression of population variances. We submit that rejecting these techniques on the basis of this study is completely unwarranted and potentially damaging, particularly if used in legal proceedings to undermine the value of testimony from children with ASD, who continually struggle to gain access to justice.

Keywords

Witnesses and victims Sketch Reinstatement of Context Verbal Labels Registered Intermediaries Investigative interview 

Supplementary material

10803_2018_3479_MOESM1_ESM.docx (55 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 54 KB)

References

  1. Baron-Cohen, S., Campbell, R., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Grant, J., & Walker, J. (1995). Are children with autism blind to the mentalistic significance of the eyes? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13, 379–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boucher, J., & Bowler, D. M. (Eds.). (2008). Memory in autism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bowler, D. M., Gaigg, S., & Lind, S. (2011). Memory in autism: Binding, self, and brain. In I. Roth & P. Rezaie (Eds.), Researching the autism spectrum disorder: Contemporary perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bowler, D. M., Gardiner, J. M., & Berthollier, N. (2004). Source memory in adolescents and adults with Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 34, 533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., & Hembrooke, H. (2002). The nature of children’s true and false narratives. Developmental Review, 22, 520–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooper, P., & Allely, C. S. (2017). You can’t judge a book by its cover: Evolving professional responsibilities, liabilities and ‘judgecraft’when a party has Asperger’s Syndrome. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 68, 35–58.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, P., & Wurtzel, D. (2014). Better the second time around? Department of Justice Registered Intermediaries Schemes and lessons from England and Wales. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 65, 39–61.Google Scholar
  8. Cooper, P., & Wurtzel, D. (2015). Registered intermediary procedural guidance manual. London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
  9. Dando, C. J. (2013). Drawing to remember: External support of older adults’ eyewitness performance. PLoS ONE, 8, e69937.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069937.
  10. Dando, C. J., Wilcock, R., & Milne, R. (2009). The cognitive interview: The efficacy of a modified mental reinstatement of context procedure for frontline police investigators. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 138–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaigg, S. B., Gardiner, J. M., & Bowler, D. M. (2008). Free recall in autism spectrum disorder: The role of relational and item-specific encoding. Neuropsychologia, 46, 983–992.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Golan, O., LaCava, P. G., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2007). Assistive technology as an aid in reducing social impairments in autism. In R. L. Gabriels & D. E. Hill (Eds.), Growing up with autism: Working with school-age children and adolescents (pp. 124–142). New York: The Guilford PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Hala, S., Rasmussen, C., & Henderson, A. M. (2005). Three types of source monitoring by children with and without autism: The role of executive function. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35, 75–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Henry, L. A., Crane, L., Nash, G., Hobson, Z., Kirke-Smith, M., & Wilcock, R. (2017). Verbal, visual, and intermediary support for child witnesses with autism during investigative interviews. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 8, 2348–2362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lamb, M. E., Rooy, D. J. La, Malloy, L. C., & Katz, C. (Eds.). (2011). Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (Vol. 53). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Leclercq, V., Le Dantec, C. C., & Seitz, A. R. (2014). Encoding of episodic information through fast task-irrelevant perceptual learning. Vision Research, 99, 5–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee, Y., & Nelder, J. A. (1996). Hierarchical generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 58, 619–678.Google Scholar
  18. Lo, S., & Andrews, S. (2015). To transform or not to transform: Using generalized linear mixed models to analyse reaction time data. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1171.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Loftus, E. F. (2003). Make-believe memories. American Psychologist, 58(11), 867–871.Google Scholar
  20. Lyon, T. D., Malloy, L. C., Quas, J. A., & Talwar, V. A. (2008). Coaching, truth induction, & young maltreated children’s false allegations and false denials. Child Development, 79, 914–929.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Marchant, R., & Page, M. (1997). The memorandum and disabled children. In H. Westcott & D. Jones (Eds.), Perspectives on the memorandum (pp. 67–79). London: Arena.Google Scholar
  22. Mattison, M., Dando, C. J., & Ormerod, T. C. (2015). Drawing to remember: Supporting child witnesses & victims with autistic spectrum disorder to give ‘Best Evidence’. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 15, 2.Google Scholar
  23. Mattison, M., Dando, C. J., & Ormerod, T. C. (2016). Drawing the answers: How sketch reinstatement supports free and probed recall by child witnesses with ASD. Autism.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316669088.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Memon, A., Wark, L., Bull, R., & Koehnken, G. (1997). Isolating the effects of the cognitive interview techniques. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2006). Interviewing victims of crime, including children and people with intellectual disabilities. In M. R. Kebbell & G. M. Davies (Eds.), Practical psychology for forensic investigations and prosecutions (pp. 7–24). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Justice. (2011). Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings: Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures. London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
  27. Naveh-Benjamin, M., Guez, J., Hara, Y., Brubaker, M. S., & Lowenschuss-Erlich, I. (2014). The effects of divided attention on encoding processes under incidental and intentional learning instructions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1682–1696.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Pansky, A., Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (2005). Eyewitness recall and testimony. In N. Brewer & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 93–150). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pipe, M. E., Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P. W. (2004). Recent research on children’s testimony about experienced and witnessed events. Developmental Review, 24, 440–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Powell, M. B., Jones, C. H., & Campbell, C. (2003). A comparison of preschoolers’ recall of experienced versus non-experienced events across multiple interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 935–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Speelman, C. P., & McGann, M. (2013). How mean is the mean? Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 451.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00451.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Coral J. Dando
    • 1
  • Thomas C. Ormerod
    • 2
  • Penny Cooper
    • 3
    • 4
  • Ruth Marchant
    • 5
  • Michelle Mattison
    • 6
  • Rebecca Milne
    • 7
  • Ray Bull
    • 8
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WestminsterLondonUK
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  3. 3.City, University of LondonLondonUK
  4. 4.Institute for Criminal Policy ResearchLondonUK
  5. 5.Ministry of Justice Registered IntermediaryLondonUK
  6. 6.Department of PsychologyUniversity of ChesterChesterUK
  7. 7.Institute of Criminal Justice StudiesUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK
  8. 8.Department of Law, Criminology and Social SciencesUniversity of DerbyDerbyUK

Personalised recommendations