Abstract
This experiment examines how a police interviewer’s judgment error and apology affect a sexual violence victim’s secondary victimization, trust in the interviewer, rapport, and willingness to provide information. Ninety students from Peru were asked to imagine being sexual violence victims and were interviewed online by a mock police interviewer. Participants were randomized into three conditions: judgment error without apology, judgment error with apology, and a no-error control. The judgment error involved suggesting the victim was partly responsible for their victimhood, citing women’s clothing choices and questioning men’s masculinity. Our findings show judgment errors reduced trust, rapport, and willingness to provide information while increasing secondary victimization; apologizing improved trust and rapport but did not affect secondary victimization or willingness to provide information. These outcomes indicate that judgment errors in sexual violence victim interviews can negatively impact the interviewing process and outcomes and highlight the importance of an apology.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-19 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Journal | Psychiatry, Psychology and Law |
| Early online date | 9 Sept 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print/First online - 9 Sept 2024 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 5 Gender Equality
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- UT-Hybrid-D
- Investigative interview
- Witness interview
- Secondary victimization
- Communication errors
- Sexual assault
- Rapport
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver