Child.4husr & Nrgkcr. Vol. 16. pp. 595-6 13, I992 Printed I” the U.S.A. All rights reserved.

Copyright

Ol45-2134/92 $5.00 + .OO 0 1992 Pergamon Press Ltd.

JUROR AND EXPERT KNOWLEDGE OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE SUSAN MORISON AND EDITH GREENE Department of Psychology, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs

Abstract-Mental health professionals with expertise in child sexual abuse (CSA) often testify as expert witnesses in court. There is significant controversy over the admissibility of this type of evidence. To be admissible, the testimony of an expert must be beyond the common knowledge of the jury and based on information generally considered to be reliable within the professional community in which it is used. To date, no empirical data have existed to allow courts to make an informed judgement as to the extent of either juror knowledge or professional acceptance of CSA data. The present study addresses this issue. Jurors and experts completed a questionnaire designed to reveal their understanding of CSA. Results indicate that experts demonstrated strong consensus on 29 of 40 items included in the questionnaire, and that relative to experts, jurors have limited knowledge of these issues. These results suggest that many of the scientific findings concerning CSA are reliable and that the information is often beyond the common knowledge of the jury. These findings argue for the use of expert testimony in select cases of child sexual abuse. Key Words-Expert

consensus, Juror knowledge.

INTRODUCTION THE LAST DECADE has witnessed the increased participation within the judicial system of mental health workers with expertise in child sexual abuse (CSA). Experts from the mental health professions are called on to provide expert testimony that falls into two broad categories. First, an expert may provide direct evidence by testifying that a particular child was sexually abused. Second, an expert may provide more limited testimony for the purpose of rehabilitating a child’s credibility. This second type of testimony is used in cases where the accused attempt to undermine a child’s credibility by arguing that delays in reporting and recantations indicate that abuse has not occurred. Expert testimony to the effect that delays, recantations, and certain other behaviors are common in sexually abused children can help the jury to better evaluate a child’s credibility. (See Melton and Limber, 1989, for a discussion of the role of psychologists in criminal prosecutions of child maltreatment.) The participation of mental health professionals has created conflict within the courts with regard to the admissibility of such evidence, with some courts allowing it (e.g., People v. Gray, 1986; People v. Roscoe, 1985; Smith v. State, 1984; State v. Kim, 1982; State v. Middleton, 1983; State v. Myers, 1984; Washington v. Petrich, 1984) and others excluding it (e.g. Hall v. Arkansas, 1985; In re Amber B., 1987; Seering v. California Dept. of Social Services, 1987;

This manuscript is based on a master’s thesis submitted to the University of Colorado by the first author. Portions were presented at the Western Psychological Association meeting in Reno, NV, 1989. Received for publication February 14, 199 1; final revision received May 3, 199 1; accepted August 30, 199 1. Requests for reprints may be sent to Edith Greene, Department of Psychology, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, CO 80933. 595

596

S. Morison and E. Greene

State v. Carlson, 1978; State v. Danielski, 1984; State v. Maule, 1983; Washington v. Fitzgerald, 1985). This study provides data of potential use to the courts in resolving this conflict. During the past two decades, the number of child sexual abuse cases processed by both the civil and criminal branches of the judicial system has increased significantly (Haugaard & Reppucci, 1988; Hensley, 1986). However, the number remains low by comparison to the number of cases thought to exist. Many cases go undetected and unreported, often never coming to the attention of the victim’s family, let alone to the medical and legal communities (Finkelhor, 1979, 1986; Kempe, 1980). One explanation for the low prosecution record for CSA cases is that child sexual abuse is a particularly difficult crime to prosecute. Child sexual abuse cases are fraught with a number of legal problems. For example, rarely is there direct evidence, either corroborating eyewitness testimony or medical or physical evidence (DeJong, 1985; Herbert, 1987; Kerns, 198 1). Consequently, the proof is often circumstantial. In the majority of cases, the accused is well known to the victim, possibly even a parent (Conte & Schuerman, 1987; Finkelhor, 1979, 1980; Russell, 1986). The victim, in turn is often of a very young age (e.g., under 5 years old) (Grant, 1984; Mannarino & Cohen, 1986) perhaps too young to testify (Berliner, Canfield-Blick, & Bulkley, 198 1; Goodman, 1984; Rogers, 1982). In addition, the adversary process may inhibit the child from testifying or create doubts in the minds of judges and jurors about his or her competence and credibility on the witness stand (Berliner et al., 1981; Yarmey & Jones, 1983). Additional problems are associated with the abuse itself. Child advocates argue that certain characteristics associated with CSA, particularly intrafamilial sexual abuse, further weaken the chances of securing a conviction. Frequently cited features include: parental ambivalence toward pursuing legal action (Berliner et al., 198 1; Haugaard & Reppucci, 1988; Summit, 1983), .delayed reporting (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986; Tufts New England Medical Center, Division of Child Psychiatry, 1984) and contradicted and recanted testimony by the victim (Goodwin, Sahd, & Rada, 1982; Jones & McGraw, 1987; Sink, 1988). Delays in reporting the abuse and contradicted and recanted testimony are used by defense lawyers to support their claim that the victim is an unreliable witness (Haugaard & Reppuci, 1988; Sink, 1988). Even when not highlighted by the defense, these factors, together with a lack of corroborating physical evidence, may still be misinterpreted by jurors as signs that the witness is fabricating (Goodman, Golding, & Haith, 1984). Experts contend, however, that these behaviors are not inconsistent with victimization and that in order to evaluate the testimony of a child victim one must have adequate knowledge of the dynamics associated with child sexual abuse (Berliner et al., 198 1; Summit, 1983; Wells, 1983). In an effort to overcome these problems and to bolster their cases, prosecutors have begun to rely on the testimony of expert witnesses. Advocates for the use of expert witnesses argue that the testimony of a qualified expert is necessary not only because of inherent weaknesses in these types of cases but also because a young traumatized child is pitted against a seemingly “respectable” adult (Roe, 1985). They suggest that the use of expert witnesses ensures the fair and appropriate treatment of the victim once he or she enters the legal arena, and provides essential information about CSA to those who must decide these cases (Berliner et al., 198 1; Summit, 1983). Those who argue against the use of expert witnesses point to the rights of the defendant to a fair trial. They suggest that this type of evidence fails to meet the judicial requirements for admittance (Cohen, 1985). Consequently, it may be prejudicial to the defendant and is, therefore, inappropriate. In determining the admissibility of expert testimony, certain requirements are considered. First, the expert must have sufficient knowledge, skill, training, education, or experience about the subject matter to be considered an expert (State v. Moran, 1986). Second, the

Knowledge of child sexual abuse

597

testimony must generally assist the jury to understand the evidence (Fed. R. Evid. 702). A number of courts have interpreted this to mean that the testimony must be about an area that is beyond the common knowledge or unde~tanding of the jury. Although jurors may not need an expert to describe matters of common knowledge, an expert can also add insight and depth to jurors’ understanding even of familiar subjects (Myers et al., 1989). Finally, the testimony must be based on information that is generally considered to be reliable within the professional community in which it is used (Frye v. U.S., 1923). In other words, the information must be widely accepted within that particular community. With regard to expert testimony in cases of child sexual abuse, the issues of reliability and helpfulness have been the focus of the debate over admissibility. (See Myers et al., 1989, for discussion of theories of admissibility and relevant case law.) Courts have been divided on the admissibility of expert testimony to rehabilitate a child’s impeached credibility, however, with most courts approving it (Myers et al., 1989). The conflict over the admissibility of expert testimony has occurred, in part, because the broad standard courts use to evaluate expert testimony (Fed. R. Evid. 702) allows differing interpretations. More importantly, however, it has resulted because courts are making a determination as to the admissibility of this evidence without any data about juror knowledge or expert consensus. To date, only one study has employed jurors in examining issues related to expert testimony on CSA (Corder & Whiteside, 1988). However, it focused on juror attitudes rather than juror knowledge and was limited in scope. In addition, no control group was used to compare level of knowledge. Similarly, few studies have been conducted with professionals as subjects. Those few studies that have been conducted have tended to look at professionals’ attitudes toward particular areas of CSA (e.g., personal reactions and views regarding prevalence, severity of the consequences, and effective interventions) (Eisenberg, Owens, & Dewey, 1987; Finkelhor, 1984; La Barbera, Martin, & Dozier, 1980). None have attempted to determine professional acceptance of current child sexual abuse data. This study examines these issues through the use of a Child Sexual Abuse Questionnaire.

METHOD Participants Participants were obtained from two populations-“ jurors” and “experts.” The juror sample was comprised of 150 residents of El Paso County (Colorado Springs), Colorado summoned to jury duty between March and October 1989. The juror sample was 56% female. Jurors ranged in age from 19 to 83 with a mean age of 39 years. The majority (72%) were married and had children (77%). Educationally, the jurors claimed between 8 and 22 years of schooling with a mean of 13 years. Fifty-five percent had attended at least some college. Of these, 32% had attended for 4 or more years. The expert sample consisted of 50 authorities identified on the basis of both research and practical experience in the area of child sexual abuse. Their names were obtained through a review of relevant literature and mental health directories. Only those persons who had published at least three articles within the last 5 years and/or whose primary focus of study or clinical experience is sexually abused children were selected. Completed questionnaires were received from 25 experts (50%). The expert sample was 60% female. Sixty-eight percent viewed themselves as research/practitioners. The remaining experts listed themselves as researchers (20%), practitioners (8%), or educators (4%). The majority (68%) had testified in a child sexual abuse case with most having testified on behalf of the prosecution rather than the

598

S. Morison and E. Greene

defense. The number of times for the prosecution ranged from one to 150 with a mean of 11. By comparison, the number of times for the defense varied from one to 15 with a mean of only 2. Materials The 40-item Child Sexual Abuse Questionniare used in this study was developed from a review of current literature on child sexual abuse. The questionnaire was designed so that subjects were required to state, to the best of their ability, the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with each of 40 statements. A 6-point Likert scale was employed, where 1 = strongly agree and 6 = strongly disagree. The items for this study were developed from only those areas where there appears to be general consensus within the literature. Topics included definitions of “child sexual abuse”; prevalence; demographics; victim, offender and offense characteristics; and typical symptoms of and reactions to abuse. In addition to these items, both jurors and experts were also asked to complete a brief demographic questionnaire. In addition, experts were provided space to state whether, based on their own personal experience, they agreed or disagreed with what the research in this area was suggesting. The questionnaire is reproduced in Appendix A and the literature supporting the items is described below. Twelve questions (numbers 1,5,8, 17,20,22,23,26,30,33,35,37) addressed beliefs about the reliability of child sexual abuse reports and typical victim responses. It has been widely advocated in both the psychological and legal communities that children are highly suggestible (Gardner, 1933; Loftus & Davies, 1984) that they may confuse fact and fantasy (Flavell, Flavell, & Green, 1983; Piaget, 1929) and that their credibility as witnesses is questionable (Bohmer, 1974; Yarmey & Jones, 1983). Many adults believe that children can easily be manipulated into giving false reports (Goodman et al., 1984; Yarmey & Jones, 1983). Empirical studies have shown, however, that children may be no more suggestible than adults (Duncan, Whitney, & Kunen, 1982; Marin, Holmes, Guth, & Kovac, 1979) that they are capable of being good witnesses (Goodman, 1984; Johnson & Foley, 1984) and, more importantly, that few of their allegations of sexual abuse prove to be false (Goodwin et al., 1982; Herbert, 1987; Peters, 1976). In addition, rather than being taken as signs that the abuse did not occur or that a child’s report is unreliable, studies indicate that delays in reporting, inconsistency in reports, lack of physical evidence, and retractions on the part of the victim are not uncommon in CSA cases (Goodman & Helgeson, 1985; Haugaard & Reppucci, 1988; Herbert, 1987; Herbert, Whynot, & Immega, 1984; Sink, 1988; White, Halpin, Strom, & Santilli, 1988). In addition, counter to what would be expected, victims do not typically react to the abuse with resistance. Rather, they tend to passively submit (Summit, 1983). Five questions (2, 10, 12, 15, 36) dealt with typical offender characteristics. A common myth about child sexual abuse is that it is perpetrated by “dirty old men” or strangers on playgrounds (Geiser, 1979). While research indicates that most assailants are male (Mannarino & Cohen, 1986; Rogers, 1982; Russell, 1983; Schlesinger, 1986) it also reveals that offenders may come from any racial, occupational, socioeconomic or age group (Finkelhor, 1984; Miller, 1976; Russell, 1983; Trainor, 1984). In addition, most are someone with whom the child is familiar, likely a parent, relative, or family friend (Finkelhor, 1979; 1980; Lyon & Kouloumpos-Lenares, 1987; Mannarino & Cohen, 1986; Rogers, 1982; Russell, 1983). Studies do indicate, however, that males are abused more often by strangers than are females (Finkelhor, 1979; Tong, Oates, & McDowell, 1987) and that older children are more likely to be abused by someone who is unfamiliar to them than are younger children (Rimsza & Niggerman, 1982; Tilelli, Turek, & Jaffe, 1980). Thirteen questions, (3, 5, 9, 10, 13, 15, 19,27,29, 3 1, 32, 34, 38) examined subject knowl-

Knowledge of child sexual abuse

599

edge with regard to typical ofinnse characteristics. The types of activities that constitute CSA may range from an isolated incident of fondling perpetrated by a stranger to ongoing intercourse between parent and child and may or may not involve the use of physical violence or force. However, the most common form of abuse involves genital and nongenital manipulation or fondling (Finkelhor, 1979; Jones & McGraw, 1987; Mannarino & Cohen, 1986). Cases involving intercourse appear to be rare. Because of the nonintrusive nature of most child sexual abuse, the use of physical violence or force to gain victim compliance appears to be uncommon (Geiser, 1979; Mannarino & Cohen, 1986; Schultz, 1977). Some victims, it is suggested, are engaging in attention-seeking behavior with a familiar and trusted adult at the time of the offense. Consequently, they do not perceive the offense as traumatic and do not resist (Schlesinger, 1983). With regard to the period of abuse, studies indicate that abuse of a longer duration (especially for boys) and more frequent abuse (especially for girls) are associated with more traumatic reactions (Friedrich, Urguiza, & Beilke, 1986; Russell, 1984). It is commonly assumed that child sexual abuse is more prevalent among lower socioeconomic groups, racial minorities, and children who are socially isolated (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986; Geiser, 1979; Tamarack, 1986). However, numerous studies suggest these assumptions are incorrect (Conte & Schuerman, 1987; Finkelhor, 1984; Miller, 1976; National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN), 198 1; O’Toole, Turbett, & Nalepka, 1983; Peters, 1984; Russell, 1983; Summit & Kryso, 1978; Trainor, 1984). Two factors that have been associated with increased risk of CSA are parental absence or unavailability and poor intrafamily relationships (Finkelhor, 1984; Herman & Hirshman, 198 1; Landis, 1956; Miller, 1976; Peters, 1984; Russell, 1983). Finally, some early studies suggested that mothers often have knowledge of father-daughter incest and deny it to themselves and others (Lustig, Dresser, Spellman, & Murray, 1966; Matchotka, Pittman, & Flomenhaft, 1967). More recent studies by Lyon and KouloumposLenares (1987) and Mannarino and Cohen (1986) show that mothers are in fact unaware. Questions 4 and 7 focused on belief about responsibility in CSA cases. According to Finkelhor and Baron (1986) all research suggests that sexual activity is initiated by the offender. However, Saunders (1988) suggests that blame is often erroneously assigned (by defense attorneys, in particular) to child victims of sexual assault, in much the same way it is to adult victims. A study of Eisenberg, Owens, and Dewey (1987) lends support to this claim. Seven questions (5, 11, 18, 19, 25, 3 1, 36) pertained to typical victim characteristics. It is commonly assumed that females and older children are the principle targets of CSA (Geiser, 1979). Although studies do indicate that females are at greater risk for abuse than are males (Finkelhor, 1979; Finkelhor & Baron, 1986; NCCAN, 198 l), they also suggest that greater numbers of males are being abused than may be suspected. Finkelhor (1979) maintains that the incidents among males may be as high as 1 in 10, as compared to 1 in 5 for females. Research reveals that child sexual abuse is an offense not limited to particular age groups. Victims of every age group have been identified, even very young children. Studies have identified children as young as 3.5 months (Ellerstein & Canavan, 1980) 8 months (Grant, 1984), 9 months (Mrazek, Lynch, & Bentovim, 1983) and 1 year (DeJong, Hervada, & Emmett, 1983). In addition, data suggest that these are not isolated incidents (Conte & Berliner, 198 1; Mannarino & Cohen, 1986; Shamroy, 1980). Questions 6, 16,24,28, and 39 addressed perceptions about the extent and consequences of child sexual abuse. Finkelhor’s (1979) work suggests that as many as 20% of all female and 10% of all male children can expect to be abused at least once during their childhood. Landis ( 1956) suggests that one in every three children will be abused. The media have done much to bring this information to the public’s attention. However, it is not known whether people believe CSA is the serious problem it appears to be.

600

S. Morison and E. Greene

Research indicates that CSA affects each victim differently (Conte & Schuerman, 1987; Friedrich et al., 1986; Runtz & Briere, 1986) and that its effects vary from individual to individual. The majority of studies suggest that children suffer negative emotional (Livingston, 1987; Runtz & Briere, 1986), sexual (Conte & Berliner, 198 1; Friedrich et al., 1986) and/or behavioral (Herbert, 1987; White, Halpin, Strom, & Santilli, 1988) consequences as a result of abuse. Several studies have revealed that not all children experience ill effects, (Constantine, 198 1; Nelson, 198 1) and data from one study suggests that 2 1% of children known to have been sexually abused were asymptomatic (Conte & Berliner, 1988). Nonetheless, the majority of clinical reports, empirical research and retrospective surveys have linked CSA with both serious short- and long-term consequences-for example, depression (Gelinas, 1983; Livingston, 1987) thought disorders (Adams-Tucker, 1982) sexual behavior problems (Einbender & Friedrich, 1989; Friedrich, Beilke, & Urguiza, 1988) selfdestructive and suicidal behavior (Adams-Tucker, 1982; Shapiro, 1987) and conduct disorders (Adams-Tucker, 1982). In addition, sexual abuse in childhood has been associated with psychological and psychosocial problems in adulthood (Briere & Runtz, 1987; Browne and Finkelhor, 1986; Gold, 1986; Haugaard & Reppucci, 1988). Although most research tends to indicate that the overt use of force by the perpetrator results in more negative initial and long term consequences for the victim (e.g., Fromuth, 1986; Russell, 1984) its presence does not appear to be a necessary factor for determining the severity of the consequences. In fact, nonviolent sexual abuse has often been shown to have the same types of effects upon the victim as violent abuse (Adams-Tucker, 1982; Finkelhor, 1979). Other factors, such as the relationships between perpetrator and victim, the age of the victim, the duration and frequency of the abuse, have also been shown to influence the seriousness of the effects (Finkelhor, 1979; Friedrich et al., 1986; Russell, 1984). Three questions (9, 14, 21) pertained to the typical medical and legal responses to CSA. Specifically, these questions tapped whether or not individuals were aware that most child sexual abuse is not reported, treated, or prosecuted (Halliday, 198 1; Haugaard & Reppucci, 1988; Rogers, 1982; Summit, 1983; Walters, 1985; Williams, 1978). Question 40 was a subjective question which asked subjects to evaluate the extent of their knowledge of CSA. Procedure Data were gathered in two ways. Jurors awaiting jury selection were approached by the experimenter and asked if they would be willing to volunteer for a study. Of those jurors approached, only seven (4.5%) refused. All participants filled out an informed consent form and were then given the questionnaire. Upon completion, participants were given a written debriefing statement. Experts were contacted by mail. A cover letter explaining the study accompanied the questionnaire.

RESULTS Expert Consensus Expert consensus was defined as agreement or strong agreement with a statement that was correct according to the research results and disagreement or strong disagreement with an incorrect statement. Eighty percent agreement with a correct statement or disagreement with an incorrect statement was arbitrarily set as the level reflective of expert consensus. Of the 40 items on the Child Sexual Abuse Questionnaire, the majority (72.5%) reflected considerable consensus among the experts. Eleven items (27.5%) were found to have a con-

601

Knowledge of child sexual abuse Table 1. Items That Reflect a Lack of Consensus Among Experts Correct Response

Item 2. Virtually all sex abusers are male. 3. It is difficult to positively identify a child who has been sexually assaulted. 8. Children who have been abused provide inconsistent information about the event(s). 18. Females are at greater risk for abuse than are males. 19. Victims of sexual abuse are just as likely to come from higher socioeconomic classes as lower socioeconomic classes. 29. If a child has been the victim of a sexual offense once, chances are that child will be abused again. 31. Children from black, rural families are more likely to be abused than are children from white, suburban families. 32. Parental absence and poor intrafamily relationships seem to be related to abuse. 35. A child who is sexually abused by a parent will still show love for that parent. 36. Older children are more likely than younger children to be abused by a stranger. 38. It is unlikely that mothers are aware of ongoing sexual abuse within the family.

Level of Consensus

Agree

36%

Agree

28%

Agree Agree

24% 56%

Agree

40%

Agree

71%

Disagree

40%

Agree

56%

Agree

32%

Agree

20%

Agree

76%

sensus level of less than 80%, thus indicating a lack of acceptance among the experts with regard to these particular topics. Table 1 lists these 11 items, the correct response for each and the level of consensus that each item attained. Of the 11 items, five pertained to typical offense characteristics (3, 29, 31, 32, 38). The six remaining items pertained to typical offender (2, 36), victim ( 18, 19), and victim response (8, 35) characteristics. These items were eliminated from further analysis. Of the 29 items reflecting expert consensus, 20 attained a consensus level of 96% or better. Of these, none were unanimously supported (100% consensus) by the experts. A list of these nine items and the correct response for each is contained in Table 2. Overall Knowledge of Jurors’ Versus Experts ’ Initial scoring was done using a strict criterion: Only those items marked with “strongly agree” (I) or “strongly disagree” (6) in the direction consistent with the research were scored

Table 2. Items That Reflect 100% Consensus Among Experts Item 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 20. 24. 28. 39.

Most child sexual abuse cases are reported, treated, and investigated. The majority of attacks against children occur on the streets or on schoolgrounds. Victims of sexual assault are primarily older teenaged children. The stereotyped “Dirty Old Man” is an inaccurate description of the typical abuser. The sexually abused child is usually physically damaged as a result of the force used in the assault. Children who retract their stories about having been abused were probably lying in the first place. Child sexual abuse is a serious problem in North America today. Sexual victimization as a child may be related to psychological and psychosocial difficulties in later life. A serious offense may have been committed even if the perpetrator did not use force.

Correct Resvonse Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree

602

S. Morison and E. Greene Table 3a. Juror and Expert Mean Responses and Standard Deviations (SD) Item

6. Child sexual abuse impacts upon victims differently. 12. The stereotyped “Dirty Old Man” is an inaccurate description of the typical abuser. 15. The great majority of victims are abused by someone who is familiar to them. 23. Children are reluctant to report an incident of sexual abuse. 24. CSA is a serious problem in North America today. 39. A serious offense may have been committed even if the perpetrator did not use force.

Mean SD

Juror

Expert

(1,773)

2.22 1.01 2.44 1.36 1.89 0.87 1.90 0.73 1.70 0.86 I .70 0.90

1.44 1.04 1.28 0.46 1.48 0.89 1.56 0.71 1.12 0.33 1.20 0.41

12.1 I* 17.32* 4.12** 5.02** 10.84* 7.00*

*p < .Ol, **p < .05 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “ 1” is consistent with the research findings.

as correct. Using this criterion, the mean score for jurors was 24% correct, and the mean score for experts was 59% correct. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant difference [F( 1, 173) = 58.30, p < .Ol] between the overall mean scores for each group. Subsequent analyses were conducted using a less strict scoring criterion: Items marked “agree/disagree” (2, 5) and “strongly agree/strongly disagree” (1, 6) were scored as correct. With this criterion, the mean juror score was 67% correct, and the mean expert score was 94% correct. One-way ANOVA again showed a significant difference between the groups, F( 1,173) = 77.70, p < .Ol. These data indicate that overall, juror knowledge is significantly less than that demonstrated by experts. Comparison of Juror and Expert Knowledge A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) using Pillais Test confirmed a significant difference between jurors and experts on 28 items for which experts showed consensus, F(28, 14 1) = 5.74, p < .Ol. (Item 40 was not included in this analysis.) Univariate ANOVAs revealed significant differences between jurors and experts on 22 (78%) of these 28 items. These data indicate that relative to experts, jurors are not well informed on many issues related to child sexual abuse. Contained in Tables 3a and 3b are the mean responses, standard deviations, and F values for these items. Juror and expert responses did not differ significantly for six items (4, 7, 16, 17,28, 37). In other words, jurors appeared to have informed knowledge about these aspects of child sexual abuse. Eighty-six percent of jurors agreed that young children do not invite abuse. A slightly greater number (88.7%) agreed that the total moral and legal responsibility for any sexual behavior between an adult and a child is the adult’s. An equal number ofjurors (88.7%) knew that serious effects upon a child may result even when no force is used’during the attack or when there is no physical damage. Ninety-three percent of jurors knew that sexual victimization as a child may be related to psychological and psychosocial difficulties in later life. Fewer jurors (68.7%) knew, however, that a child who does not display signs of distress may still be the victim of a sexual assault and be a credible witness. Juror Knowledge as a Function of Demographic Variables Mean responses by jurors’ gender, age, education, marital status, presence of children, and occupation were computed. Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) found no signifi-

Knowledge of child sexual abuse

603

Table 3b. Juror and Expert Mean Responses and Standard Deviations (SD) F

Item 1. Allegations of sexual abuse made by children often prove to be false. 5. In the majority of CSA cases, there is physical evidence to substantiate the allegation. 9. Most CSA cases are reported, treated and investigated. 10. The majority of attacks against children occur in the streets or on schoolgrounds. II. Victims of sexual assault are primarily older teenaged children. 13. The sexually abused child is usually physically damaged as a result of the force used in the assault. 14. Sex abusers are rapidly prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. 20. Children who retract their stories about having been abused were probably lying in the first place. 21. A majority of all reported cases of CSA are tried in court. 22. Individuals should be suspicious about allegations made by a child following a lengthy delay in reporting. 25. Males are very rarely the targets of sexual abuse. 26. Children are easily manipulated into giving false reports about sexual abuse. 27. The most common form of CSA involves anal or vaginal intercourse. 30. The typical reactions of children who are being abused involve: forcible resistance, crying for help, and attempted escape. 33. Children who provide inconsistent information about the alleged abuse should be considered unreliable witnesses. 34. The majority of CSA cases involve some form of violence or aggressiveness on the part of the abuser.

Mean SD

Juror

Exoert

3.99 1.37 3.43 1.39 5.00 1.00 5.06 0.9 I 4.99 0.93 3.41 1.31

5.56 1.04 5.40 0.87 5.68 0.48 5.80 0.41 5.60 0.50 5.40 0.50

5.25 0.79 4.60 1.08 4.66 1.18 4.40

5.60

fl. 1731 27.74* 43.39* 11.96’ 15.37* 9.66+ 54.17* 4.15**

1.04 16.83*

1.24

5.52 0.51 5.64 0.51 5.28 0.89

4.75 0.96 3.37 1.29 3.43 I .30 3.89 1.27

5.40 0.58 4.96 0.79 5.60 0.58 5.40 0.91

4.19 1.15

5.00 1.00

10.64*

3.39 1.38

5.08

31.51*

16.98* 11.45* I 1.02* 32.81* 63.21* 32.64*

1.32

*p < .Ol, **p < .05* 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “6” is consistent with the research findings.

cant differences in responses as a function of whether the juror had children or worked at a certain occupation. However, multiva~ate analyses of variance using Pilhas Test revealed significant differences between gender [F(29, 116) = 1.94,~ -C.Ol], age [F(87,348) = 1.57, p < .Ol], education [F(87, 348) = 1.39, p < .05], and marital status [F(87, 342) = 1.33, p < -051. With regard to gender, univariate ANOVAs showed significant differences between groups for nine items (1, 12, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 28, 37). Tables 4a and 4b list the mean responses according to gender and the F value for each of these nine items. Women outscored men on all but one item (12). This suggests that women are more knowledgeable than men. Men, however, appear to be better informed about the inaccuracy of the stereotyped image of the sex offender as a “Dirty Old Man.” Overall questionnaire scores generated for the two groups show that women scored a mean of 70%; men scored 65%. A univariate ANOVA revealed a significant difference between the gender groups for overall score, F( 1, 145) = 7.23, p -c .05. Jurors were divided into four age groups (18-3 1,32-39,40-.52,53-83 years) so that there were approximately equa1 numbers of subjects in each group. Univariate ANOVAs showed

604

S. Morison and E. Greene Table 4a. Mean Juror Responses by Gender Item

12. The stereotyped “Dirty Old Man” is an inaccurate description of the typical abuser. 23. Children are reluctant to report an incident of sexual abuse. 24. CSA is a serious problem in North America today. 28. Sexual victimization as a child may be related to psychological and psychosocial difficulties in later life.

Male

Female

(1, ?44)

2.17 2.09 1.88

2.70 1.76 1.52

1.23* 7.91* 7.49*

1.83

1.52

6.37**

*p < .Ol, **p < .05. 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “1” is consistent with the research findings.

significant differences between these groups on eight items (1, 4, 6, 9, 20, 24, 27, 28). The means for each group and F values for these eight items are displayed in Tables 5a and 5b. Post-hoc testing using the Tukey-HSD procedure showed that on five of the items ( 1,4,9, 20,28), the older age group (53-83) was significantly less knowledgeable than one of the other age groups. The youngest age group (18-3 l), for example, was more knowledgeable on three items: Allegations of sexual assault often do not prove to be false; children who retract their stories about being sexually abused were probably abused; and children do not invite abuse. Jurors from the middle two age groups (32-39 and 40-52) were also more knowledgeable than the older group for the last item. Jurors 32-39 were more knowledgeable than the oldest jurors about sexual victimization leading to difficulties in later life. Jurors 40-52 were more knowledgeable than the oldest jurors about few CSA cases being reported, treated, or investigated. A univariate ANOVA did not reveal a significant difference between the age groups for overall questionnaire score. Jurors were divided into four educational categories ( 11 years or less, 12 years, 13- 16 years, 17 years or more). Univariate ANOVAs showed significant differences between groups for seven items ( 11, 13, 15,2 1,27, 30, 34). Contained in Table 6 are the mean responses for each item and the F values. Post-hoc testing using the Tukey-HSD procedure showed that jurors with the most education (17 years or more) were significantly more knowledgeable than jurors with 12 years of education on four items: The most common form of CSA does not involve intercourse; typical reactions of victims do not involve forcible resistance, crying for help, or attempted escape; the majority of cases do not involve some form of violence or aggressiveness on the part of the abuser; and most reported cases of CSA are not tried in court. Jurors with 13- 16

Table 4b. Mean Juror Responses by Gender F

Item 1. Allegations of sexual abuse made by children often prove to be false. 17. A child who does not display signs of distress probably has not been a victim of sexual assault. 20. Children who retract their stories about having been sexually abused were probably lying in the first place. 22. Individuals should be suspicious about the allegations made by a child following a lengthy delay in reporting. 37. Young children are not credible witnesses.

Male

Female

(1. 1441

6.69

4.21

4.93*

4.40

4.82

5.47*

4.23

4.90

14.74**

4.09 4.48

4.63 4.90

7.1 I* 6.80*

*p < .05, **p < .Ol. 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “6” is consistent with the research findings.

605

Knowledge of child sexual abuse Table 5a. Mean Juror Rewonses Item 6. CSA impacts upon victims differently. 24. CSA is a serious problem in North America today. 28. Sexual victimization as a child may be related to psychological and psychosocial difficulties in later life.

by Aee

18-31

32-39

40-52

53-83

(3,742)

2.44”

1.85b

2.34

2.27

3.29*

1.62

1.54”

2.03”

1.65

2.95*

I .64

1.41”

1.77

1.92b

3.29*

* p < .05, **p < .Ol. Note. Means with different superscripts differ significantly. I = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “ 1” is consistent with the research findings.

years of school were also more knowledgeable with regard to the last item. In addition, jurors with the most education were significantly more knowledgeable than jurors with 11 years of schooling or less about the lack of physical damage accompanying abuse and about most victims being abused by someone who was familiar to them. Jurors with 13-16 years of education were better informed than jurors with 11 years of less about victims being of any age (p < .05). The finding that jurors with the most education are significantly more knowledgeable on certain items is supported by the overall questionnaire scores produced. A univariate ANOVA revealed a significant difference for education, F(3, 146) = 4.27, p < .Ol. Post-hoc testing using the Tukey-HSD procedure revealed that these jurors are significantly more knowledgeable than jurors with 12 years of education or less (p -C .05). Jurors were asked about their marital status (single, married, divorced, or widowed). Univariate ANOVAs revealed three significant differences in responses between marital status groups (4, 23, 27). The mean responses and F values for these three items are contained in Table 7. Post-hoc testing, using the TUKEY-HSD procedure, revealed that single and married jurors were better informed than widowed jurors that children do not invite abuse. Divorced

Table 5b. Mean Juror Responses

Item 1. Allegations of CSA made by children often prove to be false. 4. By their affectionate behavior young children invite CSA. 9. Most CSA cases are reported, treated, and investigated. 20. Children who retract their stories about having been abused were probably lying in the first place. 27. The most common form of CSA involves anal or vaginal intercourse.

by Aae

18-31

32-39

40-52

53-83

(3,742)

4.33”

4.44”

3.69

3.43b

5.26*

5.54”

5.51”

5.37”

4.68b

5.54*

4.85

5.13

5.31”

4.73b

2.96+*

4.90”

4.72

4.60

4.16b

3.45**

3.00”

3.38

3.91b

3.49

3.45**

*p < .Ol, **p < .05. Note. Means with different superscripts differ significantly. 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “6” is consistent with the research findings.

606

S. Morison and E. Greene Table 6. Mean Juror Resuonses bv Education 1 I Years or Less

Item II.

13.

15. 21. 27. 30.

34.

Victims of CSA are primarily older teenaged children. The sexually abused child is usually physically damaged as a result of the force used in the assault. The great majority of victims are abused by someone who is familiar to them. A majority of all reported cases of CSA are tried in court. The most common form of CSA involves anal or vaginal intercourse. The typical reactions of children who are being abused involve: forcible resistance, crying for help, and attempted escape. The majority of CSA cases involve some form of violence or aggressiveness on the part of the abuser.

12 Years

13- 16 Years

17 Years or More

(3,742)

4.56”

4.82

5.17b

5.00

2.72*

2.67”

3.37

3.39

4.23b

2.80*

2.33”

2.02

1.79

1.62b

2.73*

4.33

4.18”

4.97b

5.23b

7.17**

3.11

3.14”

3.52

4.46b

4.36*

3.44

3.45”

4.14

4.69b

6.47*

3.11

3.04”

3.51

4.46b

4.73*

* p < .05, **p < .o 1. Note. Means with different superscripts differ significantly. 1 = strongly agree, 6 = strongly disagree. On the above items, “6” is consistent with the research findings for all items except 15. For this item the response consistent with the research is “1”.

jurors, on the other hand, were more knowledgeable about children being reluctant to report an incident of sexual assault than were single jurors. They were also better informed than widowed jurors about children being credible witnesses. A univariate ANOVA did not reveal a significant difference between the marital status groups for overall questionnaire score.

DISCUSSION This study addressed factors related to several types of expert testimony in cases of child sexual abuse by evaluating whether the testimony (a) can be based on information generally

Table 7. Mean Juror Responses by Marital Status Item 4. By their affectionate behavior, young children invite CSA. 23. Children are reluctant to report an incident of CSA. 37. Young children are not credible witnesses.

Single

Married

Divorced

Widowed

(3,740,

5.46”

5.35”

5.14

4.22b

3.29*

2.25”

1.86

1.43b

1.78

3.00*

4.33

4.82

5.29”

4.22b

3.06*

*p