Pragmatic failure and referential ambiguity when attorneys ask child witnesses "do you know/remember" questions

Angela D. Evans, Stacia Roosevelt, Thomas D. Lyon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

"Do you know" and "Do you remember" (DYK/R) questions explicitly ask whether one knows or remembers some information while implicitly asking for that information. This study examined how 4- to 9-year-old (N = 104) children testifying in child sexual abuse cases responded to DYK/R wh- (who, what, where, why, how, and which) and yes/no questions. When asked DYK/R questions containing an implicit wh- question requesting information, children often provided unelaborated "yes" responses. Attorneys' follow-up questions suggested that children usually misunderstood the pragmatics of the questions. When DYK/R questions contained an implicit yes/no question, unelaborated "yes" or "no" responses could be responding to the explicit or the implicit questions resulting in referentially ambiguous responses. Children often provided referentially ambiguous responses and attorneys usually failed to disambiguate children's answers. Although pragmatic failure following DYK/R wh- questions decreased with age, the likelihood of referential ambiguity following DYK/R yes/no questions did not. The results highlight the risks of serious miscommunications caused by pragmatic misunderstanding and referential ambiguity when children testify.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)191-199
Number of pages9
JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
Volume23
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Fingerprint

Lawyers
witness
pragmatics
Sexual Child Abuse
sexual violence

Keywords

  • Child witnesses
  • Pragmatics
  • Referential ambiguity
  • Testimony

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this

Pragmatic failure and referential ambiguity when attorneys ask child witnesses "do you know/remember" questions. / Evans, Angela D.; Roosevelt, Stacia; Lyon, Thomas D.

In: Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 23, No. 2, 01.05.2017, p. 191-199.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{50676f42280c4fc3a19ac941e4f1780d,
title = "Pragmatic failure and referential ambiguity when attorneys ask child witnesses {"}do you know/remember{"} questions",
abstract = "{"}Do you know{"} and {"}Do you remember{"} (DYK/R) questions explicitly ask whether one knows or remembers some information while implicitly asking for that information. This study examined how 4- to 9-year-old (N = 104) children testifying in child sexual abuse cases responded to DYK/R wh- (who, what, where, why, how, and which) and yes/no questions. When asked DYK/R questions containing an implicit wh- question requesting information, children often provided unelaborated {"}yes{"} responses. Attorneys' follow-up questions suggested that children usually misunderstood the pragmatics of the questions. When DYK/R questions contained an implicit yes/no question, unelaborated {"}yes{"} or {"}no{"} responses could be responding to the explicit or the implicit questions resulting in referentially ambiguous responses. Children often provided referentially ambiguous responses and attorneys usually failed to disambiguate children's answers. Although pragmatic failure following DYK/R wh- questions decreased with age, the likelihood of referential ambiguity following DYK/R yes/no questions did not. The results highlight the risks of serious miscommunications caused by pragmatic misunderstanding and referential ambiguity when children testify.",
keywords = "Child witnesses, Pragmatics, Referential ambiguity, Testimony",
author = "Evans, {Angela D.} and Stacia Roosevelt and Lyon, {Thomas D.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/law0000116",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "191--199",
journal = "Psychology, Public Policy, and Law",
issn = "1076-8971",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pragmatic failure and referential ambiguity when attorneys ask child witnesses "do you know/remember" questions

AU - Evans, Angela D.

AU - Roosevelt, Stacia

AU - Lyon, Thomas D.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - "Do you know" and "Do you remember" (DYK/R) questions explicitly ask whether one knows or remembers some information while implicitly asking for that information. This study examined how 4- to 9-year-old (N = 104) children testifying in child sexual abuse cases responded to DYK/R wh- (who, what, where, why, how, and which) and yes/no questions. When asked DYK/R questions containing an implicit wh- question requesting information, children often provided unelaborated "yes" responses. Attorneys' follow-up questions suggested that children usually misunderstood the pragmatics of the questions. When DYK/R questions contained an implicit yes/no question, unelaborated "yes" or "no" responses could be responding to the explicit or the implicit questions resulting in referentially ambiguous responses. Children often provided referentially ambiguous responses and attorneys usually failed to disambiguate children's answers. Although pragmatic failure following DYK/R wh- questions decreased with age, the likelihood of referential ambiguity following DYK/R yes/no questions did not. The results highlight the risks of serious miscommunications caused by pragmatic misunderstanding and referential ambiguity when children testify.

AB - "Do you know" and "Do you remember" (DYK/R) questions explicitly ask whether one knows or remembers some information while implicitly asking for that information. This study examined how 4- to 9-year-old (N = 104) children testifying in child sexual abuse cases responded to DYK/R wh- (who, what, where, why, how, and which) and yes/no questions. When asked DYK/R questions containing an implicit wh- question requesting information, children often provided unelaborated "yes" responses. Attorneys' follow-up questions suggested that children usually misunderstood the pragmatics of the questions. When DYK/R questions contained an implicit yes/no question, unelaborated "yes" or "no" responses could be responding to the explicit or the implicit questions resulting in referentially ambiguous responses. Children often provided referentially ambiguous responses and attorneys usually failed to disambiguate children's answers. Although pragmatic failure following DYK/R wh- questions decreased with age, the likelihood of referential ambiguity following DYK/R yes/no questions did not. The results highlight the risks of serious miscommunications caused by pragmatic misunderstanding and referential ambiguity when children testify.

KW - Child witnesses

KW - Pragmatics

KW - Referential ambiguity

KW - Testimony

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010434984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85010434984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/law0000116

DO - 10.1037/law0000116

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85010434984

VL - 23

SP - 191

EP - 199

JO - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

JF - Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

SN - 1076-8971

IS - 2

ER -