Recently scientist have come foward with the results of a study which tested a child's memory of events. This surveying of the 250 sexually abused children ages 4-10 that participated in the study helps scientists try to figure out how credible their testimony is when on the witness stand or describing a crime that actually happened to them over time. They found that by the time the younger victims reached the age of ten they could begin to elaborate on the specific times, dates, and events of their abuse. This increase in detail as they aged may be attributed to the children's developing capability to elaborate. The older children in the study could focus on specific times and dates while the younger children could only give loose time frames like "after I got home from school", though this was able to become more specific as they matured and began to fine tune their memory of the crime. This has provided much insight into the credibility of children when testifying, and researchers have found that there will be more success if the children are allowed to be prompted by questions about the time and date and sequence of events, and that the child's ability to recall specific dates and times should do little to discredit the victim's reliability, rather they are just not as developmentally able to recall such facts.
http://www.brightsurf.com/news/headlines/31707/Childrens_ability_to_describe_past_event_develops_over_time.html
7 comments:
I think that this is a very interesting topic. So far, no other students have chosen a current event having to do with sexual abuse. Also, no one has chosen a topic having to do with children and their role in forensic science. Secondly, I think that finding of this study are interesting, as well. The fact that older children have a better grasp on past events makes sense, but the I was still surprised by the findings. Thirdly, I feel that the information was summarized well and clearly presented. I was completely able to understand the study and findings.
Maybe a little more information could be given concerning the study. I would be curious to learn more. Also, I would be curious to know the opinion of the other on these findings.
I never knew children could play an important role in forensic science and the conviction of criminals.
You chose a very interesting event. It is obvious that a ten year old can point out an event better than a five year old; however, the interesting part is once they have reached an appropriate age, they are able to put a time on something that happened when there mind was not as developed. I felt that it was rather short but overall very well done.
This topic is very interesting. The realization about the importance of children to forensic study is amazing. The importance of remembering past events is very significant to cases involving murder or any other crime. The information entered in this column was very helpful and it contributed to a wider recognition of how truly important children are. If more specific information could be given and some tests put in, I believe this piece would be an even greater article to read.
This is a very well written article that i enjoyed reading about. I found this article very interesting in how they used the brains of young children to show the development of a human. I also liked how they were now using children and their memory to investigate and make forensic science breakthroughs. finally i liked how u summed up the article very succinctly and thoroughly. I would only have made a couple changes to this summary. One minor change that could have been made was to add the process that they used to get the information about the chidren. Another change i would have made to the summary would have been to make a more precise conclusion of what was concluded in the article. I had never known that the studying of childrens ability to describe past events over time would be such a great and needed investigation in forensic science.
Although the title of the summary was not exactly the most attention grabbing, I became increasingly interested in the article as I read on. I enjoyed how you broke down the article into basic terms and conveyed the main ideas of the article in an easy to understand format. I was interested to hear that over time children were able to elaborate on most instances in more detail than when they were younger. I would think that the exact opposite would be the case, but at the summary of the article explained, an increase in age gave the child the ability to learn how to articulate specific facts, times, and other crucial information. I also liked how you used specific numbers such as 250 sexually abused children and children ages 4-10, because this allowed the reader to know the ages and number of children participating in this research.
On a slightly more critical side, I think you could have made you summary a little longer and a little more in-depth on why children are able to recall details better as they become a little older.
Yet, overall I really enjoyed reading your current event and am interested in learning more about this new study.
This summary was very nicely done! It was understandable and not to lengthy. It made sense that an older child would be able to recall specific information, however; I didn't think that a young child who was abused would be able to remember specific times when they weren't even able to do that at a young age. How would a child be able to pick up on that? How does this work? What goes on in the brain that actually makes this happen? The article was very interesting but the author of this summary should have included more scientific evidence that proves the fascinating discovery made. It was overall quite an interesting and a well-written summary.
This summary was very nicely done! It was understandable and not to lengthy. It made sense that an older child would be able to recall specific information, however; I didn't think that a young child who was abused would be able to remember specific times when they weren't even able to do that at a young age. How would a child be able to pick up on that? How does this work? What goes on in the brain that actually makes this happen? The article was very interesting but the author of this summary should have included more scientific evidence that proves the fascinating discovery made. It was overall quite an interesting and a well-written summary.
Post a Comment