Attorneys' experiences, perceptions, and plea recommendations in child sexual abuse cases.

Objective: We examined attorneys' experiences, perceptions, and decisions regarding plea recommendations in child sexual cases.

Hypotheses: We hypothesized that characteristics of the child (age, relationship to alleged perpetrator) and the report (timing of disclosure, consistency across reports) would affect attorneys' perceptions of evidence strength, likelihood of conviction, and plea recommendations.

Method: We collected data from a national sample of actively practicing prosecutors (n = 217) and defense attorneys (n = 251) who had experience with child abuse cases.

Further action toward valid science in Law and Human Behavior: Requiring open data, analytic code, and research materials.

In 2019, the inaugural editorial of promised a measured approach to increasing transparency, openness, and replicability practices in the journal. Now, 3 years later, and on the brink of the present authors' last year as the editorial team, it seems only fitting that they take further action to bolster the validity of science published in the journal by requiring that authors openly report data, analytic code, and research materials. The purpose of this editorial is to briefly outline 's new requirements.

A national survey of child forensic interviewers: Implications for research, practice, and law.

Objective: We surveyed a national sample of child forensic interviewers to learn the types of information they wanted to have before interviewing children, their attitudes and beliefs about forensic interviews, the characteristics of their interviews, and their professional experiences.

Hypotheses: We predicted (1) interviewers would want many different types of information before interviewing children, but specifically details about the child, alleged abuse, and disclosure, and that interviewers would find this information helpful and accessible; (2) interviewers would consider their own interviews to be neutral and nonleading and to yield accurate and complete information from children; interviewers' concern about false reports would be related to (3) the amount of preinterview information they wanted and (4) their years of experience and amount of training.

Method: Forensic interviewers ( = 781) from all 50 states and the District of Columbia completed all ( = 754) or part ( = 27) of a questionnaire that consisted of open- and closed-ended questions.

Taking the next steps: Promoting open science and expanding diversity in Law and Human Behavior.

In this editorial, the authors note that steady submission rate and a rejection rate that hovers at 80%, indicates the journal is flourishing and provides them with the fortunate opportunity to make an excellent journal even better. To that end, they describe three initiatives they are working on and explain the changes readers can expect as they begin to implement them in the journal. Specifically, these initiatives include: (1) promoting transparency, openness, and reproducibility in published research; (2) improving author-reviewer fit; and (3) expanding the diversity of journal content and decision makers.

Adversarial allegiance: The devil is in the evidence details, not just on the witness stand.

This study examined the potential influence of adversarial allegiance on expert testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse case. A national sample of 100 witness suggestibility experts reviewed a police interview of an alleged 5-year-old female victim. Retaining party (prosecution, defense) and interview suggestibility (low, high) varied across experts.

Support Person Presence and Child Victim Testimony: Believe it or Not.

This study examined the effects of support person presence on participants' perceptions of an alleged child sexual abuse victim and defendant. Two hundred jury-eligible community members (n = 100 males) viewed a DVD of an 11-year-old girl's simulated courtroom testimony either with or without a female support person seated next to her. Participants found the child victim to be less accurate and trustworthy, and the defendant to be less guilty and less likely to have sexually abused children, when the support person was present.

SUPPORTING CHILDREN IN U.S. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: Descriptive and Attitudinal Data From a National Survey of Victim/Witness Assistants.

We conducted a national survey of 786 victim/witness assistants (VWAs) to provide descriptive and attitudinal information about support person use in U.S. legal proceedings involving children.

Do Jurors Get What They Expect? Traditional versus Alternative Forms of Children's Testimony.

This study examined prospective jurors' expectancies for the verbal and nonverbal behavior of a child testifying in a sexual abuse case. Community members (N = 261) reporting for jury duty completed a survey in which they described their expectancies for how a child alleging sexual abuse would appear when testifying and their beliefs about discerning children's truthfulness, testimony stress, and fairness to trial parties. Within this survey, we varied the child's age (5, 10, or 15 years old), type of abuse alleged (vaginal fondling or penetration), and whether the abuse actually occurred (yes, no) between participants across five different testimony conditions (traditional live in-court, support person present, closed-circuit television, preparation, and videotape) within each participant.

Beliefs and expectancies in legal decision making: an introduction to the Special Issue.

This introduction describes what the co-editors believe readers can expect in this Special Issue. After beliefs and expectancies are defined, examples of how these constructs influence human thought, feeling, and behavior in legal settings are considered. Brief synopses are provided for the Special Issue papers on beliefs and expectancies regarding alibis, children's testimony behavior, eyewitness testimony, confessions, sexual assault victims, judges' decisions in child protection cases, and attorneys' beliefs about jurors' perceptions of juvenile offender culpability.

I spy with my little eye: jurors' detection of internal validity threats in expert evidence.

This experiment examined whether jury-eligible community members (N = 223) were able to detect internally invalid psychological science presented at trial. Participants read a simulated child sexual abuse case in which the defense expert described a study he had conducted on witness memory and suggestibility. We varied the study's internal validity (valid, missing control group, confound, and experimenter bias) and publication status (published, unpublished).

All anchors are not created equal: the effects of Per Diem versus lump sum requests on pain and suffering awards.

This experiment examined whether different quantifications of the same damage award request ($175,000 lump sum, $10/hour, $240/day, $7300/month for 2 years) influenced pain and suffering awards compared to no damage award request. Jury-eligible community members (N = 180) read a simulated personal injury case in which defendant liability already had been determined. Awards were: (1) larger for the $10/hour and $175,000 conditions than the $7300/month and control conditions and (2) more variable for the $10/hour condition than the $7300/month and control conditions.

Can jurors recognize missing control groups, confounds, and experimenter bias in psychological science?

This study examined the ability of jury-eligible community members (N = 248) to detect internal validity threats in psychological science presented during a trial. Participants read a case summary in which an expert testified about a study that varied in internal validity (valid, missing control group, confound, and experimenter bias) and ecological validity (high, low). Ratings of expert evidence quality and expert credibility were higher for the valid versus missing control group versions only.