Department of Psychology, University of Westminster, 115 New Cavendish Street, London, W1W 6UW, UK.
School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2018 Jul;48(7):2593-2596. doi: 10.1007/s10803-018-3479-z.
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.
最近，Henry 等人（J Autism Dev Disord 8:2348-2362, 2017）发现，在采访被诊断为自闭症谱系障碍的儿童时，法医从业者并没有使用语言标签、情景重现和注册中介。我们考虑了他们的说法，注意到实验范式的有限生态有效性，在没有第一次检索时提供检索支持的情况下，反复采访的影响，质疑采访者/中介的培训及其与人群相关的经验，并评论了人群差异的抑制。我们认为，基于这项研究拒绝这些技术是完全没有道理的，而且可能具有破坏性，特别是如果在法律程序中使用这些技术来破坏来自自闭症谱系障碍儿童证词的价值，他们一直在努力获得司法公正。
