Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RQ, UK.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2019 Mar;49(3):1111-1130. doi: 10.1007/s10803-018-3815-3.
Twenty-seven autistic children and 32 typically developing (TD) peers were questioned about an experienced event after a two-week delay and again after a two-month delay, using the Revised National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol. Recall prompts elicited more detailed and more accurate responses from children than recognition prompts. Autistic children recalled fewer correct narrative details than TD peers when questioned using open invitations, cued invitations, and directive questions. Nonetheless, they were as accurate as TD peers when responding to all types of prompts. The informativeness and accuracy of children's reports remained unchanged over time. Social support was beneficial when children were interviewed for the first time but not after a longer delay.
27 名自闭症儿童和 32 名典型发育（TD）儿童在两周和两个月的延迟后，使用修订后的国立儿童健康与人类发展研究所（NICHD）调查访谈协议，就一次经历过的事件接受了询问。回忆提示比识别提示更能从儿童那里引出更详细和更准确的回答。在使用开放式邀请、提示式邀请和指令性问题对自闭症儿童进行询问时，他们回忆的正确叙述细节比 TD 对照组少。尽管如此，他们在回答各种提示时与 TD 对照组一样准确。随着时间的推移，儿童报告的信息量和准确性保持不变。在第一次接受采访时，社会支持是有益的，但在较长时间的延迟后则不然。
