t even remember anything

88 Pages·2017·1.09 MB·English

Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations
from the Faculty of Medicine 1381
‘I don’t even remember anything’
Optimising the choice of method when interviewing
preschoolers
KARIN FÄNGSTRÖM
ACTA
UNIVERSITATIS
ISSN 1651-6206
UPSALIENSIS
ISBN 978-91-513-0106-8
UPPSALA
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-331193
2017
Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Sal IX,
Universitetshuset, Biskopsgatan 3, Uppsala, Friday, 1 December 2017 at 09:15 for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Faculty of Medicine). The examination will be conducted
in Swedish. Faculty examiner: Docent Sara Landström (Psykologiska institutionen, Göteborgs
universitet).
Abstract
Fängström, K. 2017. ‘I don’t even remember anything’. Optimising the choice of method
when interviewing preschoolers. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations
from the Faculty of Medicine 1381. 86 pp. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
ISBN 978-91-513-0106-8.
There is increasing need and demand in various contexts to take children’s perspectives into
account, including the views and opinions of the youngest children. However, listening to the
voices of children is a challenging and complex task, and the field is normatively loaded. There is
thus a growing need for valid and reliable methods and techniques that aid children to verbalise
their experiences. The overall aim of this thesis was to examine the ability of the In My Shoes
computer assisted interview and a Standard verbal interview to elicit accurate information and
evaluative content, when used with preschool-aged children and determine their suitability in
relation to situationally shy children.
Our studies show that the two interview methods, in general, provided equally accurate and
complete statements. In addition, the IMS interview can be a more useful and suitable tool
during the rapport phase with situationally shy children compared to the Standard verbal method.
For non-shy children, the interview methods were equally adequate. In relation to evaluative
information, the recommended open-ended questions in the Standard verbal interview were
insufficient. Children appeared to need evaluative questions in order to provide evaluative
content. Examining the ability of IMS to elicit subjective experiences showed that using IMS
aided children to provide detailed and varied descriptions of emotions, somatic experiences, and
objects such as toys.
Thus, when choosing the optimal child interview method, there are several aspects that need
to be considered, including the degree to which children’s statements need to be accurate and
complete and/or contain evaluative information and the child’s level of shyness. These studies
have increased the number of evaluated methods for interviewing children and contributed to
new knowledge about the challenging task of optimising the choice of method for interviewing
preschoolers.
Keywords: child, interview method, computer-assisted interview, validity, forensic, shy,
distress, emotion
Karin Fängström, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Social Medicine,
Uppsala Science Park, Uppsala University, SE-75185 Uppsala, Sweden.
© Karin Fängström 2017
ISSN 1651-6206
ISBN 978-91-513-0106-8
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-331193 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-331193)
Gutta cavat lapidem,
non vi, sed saepe cadendo.

Ovidius, AD 14–16

List of Papers
This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text
by their Roman numerals.

I Fängström, K., Bokström, P., Dahlberg, A., Calam, R., Lucas,
S., & Sarkadi, A. (2016). In My Shoes – Validation of a computer
assisted approach for interviewing children. Child Abuse and Ne-
glect, 58:160–172.

II Fängström, K., Salari, R., Eriksson, M., & Sarkadi, A. The com-
puter assisted interview In My Shoes can benefit shy preschool
children’s communication. PLoS ONE, 12.

III Fängström, K., Sarkadi, A., Lucas, S., Calam, R., & Eriksson,
M. (2017) “And they gave me a shot, it really hurt”– Evaluative
content in investigative interviews with young children. Children
and Youth Services Review, 82: 434-443

IV Bokström, P., Fängström, K., Calam, R., Lucas, S., & Sarkadi,
A. (2015). “I felt a little bubbly in my tummy” – Eliciting pre-
schoolers’ accounts of their health visit using a computer-as-
sisted interview method. Child: Care, Health and Development,
42: 87–97.

Reprints were made with permission from the respective publishers.

Contents
Foreword ................................................................................................... 11
Introduction ............................................................................................... 13
Background ............................................................................................... 14
Children’s rights ................................................................................... 14
Different theories and perspectives on children ................................... 15
Interviews in institutional settings ........................................................ 20
The information gathered ..................................................................... 22
Factors affecting the interview ............................................................. 23
Evidence-based interview components and protocols ......................... 29
Rationale for this thesis ............................................................................. 35
Overall and specific aims .......................................................................... 37
General method ......................................................................................... 38
Participants ........................................................................................... 38
Procedure .............................................................................................. 40
Study I: Comparing the two interview methods’ ability to elicit
accurate and complete information ........................................................... 44
Aim ....................................................................................................... 44
Methods ................................................................................................ 44
Results .................................................................................................. 45
Conclusion ............................................................................................ 46
Study II: The suitability of the interview methods in relation to child
shyness ...................................................................................................... 47
Aim ....................................................................................................... 47
Methods ................................................................................................ 47
Results .................................................................................................. 48
Conclusions .......................................................................................... 49
Study III: The standard verbal interview’s ability to elicit evaluative
content ....................................................................................................... 50
Aim ....................................................................................................... 50
Methods ................................................................................................ 50
Results .................................................................................................. 50
Conclusion ............................................................................................ 51
Study IV: The IMS interview’s ability to elicit children’s subjective
experiences ................................................................................................ 52
Aim ....................................................................................................... 52
Methods ................................................................................................ 52
Results .................................................................................................. 53
Conclusion ............................................................................................ 54
Methodological considerations ................................................................. 55
Discussion ................................................................................................. 60
Which interview method is the best? ................................................... 60
The information sought after ................................................................ 61
Individual characteristics of the child .................................................. 64
Transferring methods between contexts ............................................... 65
Conclusions ............................................................................................... 67
Clinical implications ................................................................................. 68
Future research .......................................................................................... 70
Acknowledgements ................................................................................... 72
References ................................................................................................. 75
Abbreviations
UNCRC United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
CHC Child Health Centre
IMS In My Shoes computer assisted interview
NCAC National Children’s Advocacy Center
NE Narrative Elaboration
CI Cognitive Interviewing