Child Sexual Abuse Interviews

Abstract

Although anatomic dolls have been in use for almost two decades, a number of clinicians and legal professionals dispute the reliability of information obtained through their use. This study examines (a) the interrater reliability of information obtained during child sexual abuse assessments that used a clinical assessment interview protocol featuring anatomic dolls and (b) the patterns of disclosure and doll demonstration across the subject's age, gender, and case outcome. Issues of interrater reliability focused on the comparison of questionnaire responses of interviewers with those of unobtrusive observers. Particular items examined for reliability included children's specific disclosure statements, doll demonstrations associated with specific disclosure statements, and those affective/expressive behaviors of children that may be salient considerations in a clinical assessment. Interrater reliability was highest for questions addressing children's statements and lowest for those addressing affective/expressive behaviors. Results suggest specific areas of observation and interpretations that tend to be typically ambiguous as well as those that may be more dependent on the experience and skill of the interviewer.