The quality of children's allegations of abuse in investigative interviews containing practice narratives

To enhance the accuracy and completeness of children's testimony, recommendations have included implementing a practice narrative, during which children are prepared for their role as informative witnesses before discussing the allegations. In the present study, we aimed to systematically examine interviewer behaviour and the informativeness of children's testimony in a field setting. As predicted, interviewers posed fewer prompts, proportionally more open-ended prompts, and children provided proportionally more details in response to open-ended prompts in the substantive phase when preceded by a practice narrative than when no practice narrative was conducted. The relationship was enhanced when the practice narratives were conducted as recommended vs those that were conducted in a less open-ended manner. Together with experimental studies showing clear benefits of practice narratives on children's reports, these results underscore the value of a simple practice narrative as a means of enhancing the reliability of children's testimony.

► In interviews containing a practice narrative, interviewers posed fewer prompts and proportionally more open-ended prompts.
► Children provided more details in response to open-ended prompts when a practice narrative had taken place.
► When practice narratives were conducted as recommended, benefits to interview quality were even more pronounced.