Helping Children Tell What Happened: A Follow-Up Study of the Narrative Elaboration Procedure

In cases of child maltreatment, children are required to recount past experiences in pretrial interviews, courtroom examination, and abuse-focused therapy. Yet their descriptions are often insufficient for risk assessment, legal decision making, and treatment planning. In the present study, we test whether a new procedure—narrative elaboration—facilitates children's recall without jeopardizing accuracy. Thirty-three second graders participated in a classroom activity. Two weeks later, they were randomly assigned to participate in one of two preparation sessions before being interviewed about the classroom activity: (a) narrative elaboration intervention or (b) control session. The interviewer was an unfamiliar authority figure. The interview entailed free recall (e.g., “What happened?”), cued recall (i.e., an opportunity to elaborate on free recall with visual cues), and follow-up questions. On the cued recall task, children prepared with the narrative elaboration procedure reported significantly more correct information than children in the control group. Performance was improved without increasing error or reducing correct responses to follow-up questions. The implications of these results for questioning suspected child abuse victims are discussed.