Warren Kelly L, Peterson Carole, Gillingham Cassy C
Psychology Program, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Corner Brook, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2018 Jun 19;25(5):789-805. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1478336. eCollection 2018.
In this study, the usefulness of linguistic analysis in determining the veracity of children's accounts is examined. The Linguistic Inquiry Word Count 2007 program was used to analyze 95 stories told by 5- to 14-year-olds who were telling the truth or a lie about the stressful experience of breaking a bone or requiring sutures for serious lacerations. Half of the children were coached by parents in preparing their story over the four days prior to giving their account. Differences emerged in the linguistic style used as a function of age, presence of coaching and event veracity. Very few linguistic categories emerged as significant predictors of event veracity, and the variables that did emerge were different depending upon the presence of coaching. Since in real-life situations one seldom knows a child's coaching history, these findings suggest that it is inappropriate to use linguistic analysis to assess the veracity of children's accounts.
在本研究中,考察了语言分析在确定儿童陈述真实性方面的效用。使用2007版语言查询词频程序,对95名5至14岁儿童讲述的故事进行分析,这些儿童讲述的是关于骨折或严重撕裂伤需要缝合的压力性经历,有的陈述是真实的,有的则是说谎。一半的儿童在陈述前四天由父母指导编写故事。语言风格因年龄、是否有指导以及事件真实性而有所不同。很少有语言类别成为事件真实性的显著预测指标,而且根据是否有指导,出现的变量也不同。由于在现实生活中,人们很少知道孩子的指导经历,这些发现表明,使用语言分析来评估儿童陈述的真实性是不合适的。