<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
      <oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/">
      <dc:title>Effects of Cognitive Interviewing, Practice, and Interview Style on Children's Recall Performance in California, 1989-1990  </dc:title>
		
      		<dc:creator>Geiselman, R. Edward</dc:creator>
      	
      		<dc:creator>Saywitz, Karen J.</dc:creator>
      	
      		<dc:creator>Bornstein, Gail K.</dc:creator>
      	
		
      		<dc:subject>children</dc:subject>
      	
      		<dc:subject>courts</dc:subject>
      	
      		<dc:subject>court cases</dc:subject>
      	
      		<dc:subject>testimony</dc:subject>
      	
		
      		<dc:subject>ICPSR.XVII.E</dc:subject>
      	
      		<dc:subject>NACJD.V</dc:subject>
      	
      	<dc:description>This data collection, designed to improve the quality of
 children's testimony in court, evaluates how different types of
 interview formats affect the completeness and accuracy of children's
 recall performance. Specifically, the study assesses the impact of a
 "practice interview" about an event on the completeness and accuracy
 of later reports about a second, unrelated event. Three interview
 conditions were employed, and each condition consisted of both a
 practice interview and a target interview. The three conditions were
 RS, RC, and CC, where "R" represents a practice session with
 rapport-building only, "S" represents a target interview that
 contained all components of the standard interview procedure, and
 "C" represents either a practice or target interview that contained
 all components of the cognitive interview procedure. In
 rapport-building sessions, interviewers talked about school
 activities, family life, and favorite games with the child. In
 standard and cognitive interview sessions, the rapport-building
 sessions were followed by a request from the interviewer for the child
 to verbalize a narrative account of "what happened" during an event
 that had been previously staged by the experimenter. This narrative
 account was then followed by the interviewer's request for additional
 information about the event. Cognitive interviews also included
 several additional questions that were hypothesized to improve recall
 performance. The number of correct items recalled and the number of
 incorrect items generated were used to compare the performance of
children in the three interview conditions.</dc:description>
		
      	<dc:date>2005-11-04</dc:date>
	    
      		<dc:type>clinical data</dc:type>
      	
      	<dc:identifier>9789</dc:identifier>
      	<dc:identifier>10.3886/ICPSR09789.v1</dc:identifier>
    	
      		<dc:source>personal interviews in a clinical setting</dc:source>
      	
    	
      		<dc:coverage>California</dc:coverage>
      	
      		<dc:coverage>United States</dc:coverage>
      	
		
      		<dc:coverage>1989--1990</dc:coverage>
      	
      	<dc:rights> ICPSR metadata records are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 
        3.0 United States License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/).</dc:rights>
      </oai_dc:dc>
