Questioning the expertise of “experts” who recommend active hypothesis testing in child forensic interviews
Abstract The McMartin Preschool case in the 1980s was one of several alleged day care sex abuse cases that highlighted the need to establish best practices in forensic child interviews. As a result of that case, tens of millions of dollars were allocated to study and develop child interviewing techniques that were most likely to preserve the integrity of the accounts of children identified as possible victims and survivors of child abuse. That research led to the identification and standardization of the child forensic interviewing techniques widely used today. Despite the creation of best practices for child forensic interviews, courts sometimes accept as expert witnesses professionals who promote practices that should not be used when interviewing children who may have been victimized. A recent case in Canada underscores the critical need for awareness of best practices in child forensic interviews. This discussion article examines the dangers of viewing the lack of active hypothesis testing as a sign of poor interviewing.
Authors
- Michael E. Lamb (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6792-3526)
- Warren Binford (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3318-1106)
- Gina Dimitropoulos (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9487-0290)
- Heather L. Price (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6109-6198)
- Sarah MacDonald (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8245-2347)
- Naomi J. Parker (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0472-8811)
Institutions
- Thompson Rivers University (CA)
- University of Calgary (CA)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Ontario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Health (CA)
- University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US)
- University of Colorado Denver (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Juvenile and Family Court Journal
- Published
- 2025-08-22
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.70016
- Primary Topic
- Deception detection and forensic psychology
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00