Assessing the credibility of children's allegations of sexual abuse: A survey of recent research

Abstract

Alarmed by the increasing numbers of alleged incidents of child sexual abuse, forensic psychologists have attempted to learn whether credible and implausible allegations can be discriminated reliably. Most attention has focused on components of Statement Validity Analysis (SVA), particularly Criterion-Based Content Analysis (CBCA). Recent studies have shown that CBCA scores indeed distinguish plausible from implausible accounts, although the precision is still too poor to permit forensic application. Sensitivity may be enhanced by further improvements in the quality of the investigative interviews on which evaluations of credibility are based, and may be additionally enhanced by development and application of techniques like the Validity Checklist, a little studied component of SVA.