Researchers studying children’s reports of sexual abuse have focused on how questioners overtly assess coaching and truthfulness (e.g., “Did someone tell you what to say?”). Yet attorneys, and defense attorneys, in particular, may be motivated to ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness in subtle ways, such as with implied meaning (e.g., “Did your mom help you remember?”). Such questions may be particularly challenging for children, who may interpret statements literally, misunderstanding the suggested meaning. The purpose of this study was to examine and categorize how attorneys’ ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness. We wanted to learn how attorneys subtly accuse suggestive influence, and how frequently this occurred. We hypothesized that questions indirectly accusing suggestive influence would be common, and that defense attorneys would ask more subtle questions, and fewer overt questions, than prosecutors. We examined 7,103 lines of questioning asked by prosecutors and defense attorneys to 64 children testifying about alleged child sexual abuse. We found that 9% of all attorneys’ lines of questioning asked about suggestive influence or truthfulness. The majority (66%) of these were indirect accusations. Indirect accusations of suggestive influence spanned a range of subtleties and topics, including addressing conversational influences (e.g., coaching), incidental influences (e.g., witnessing abuse), and others. We also found defense attorneys were less likely than prosecutors to ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness overtly. We conclude that attorneys commonly ask about suggestive influence and truthfulness in subtle ways that developing children may struggle to understand, and which may result in affirmations of influence, even when allegations are true.

研究儿童性虐待报告的研究人员将重点放在提问者如何公开评估辅导和真实性（例如，“有人告诉你该说什么吗？”）。然而，律师，尤其是辩护律师，可能会以微妙的方式询问暗示性影响和真实性，例如隐含的意思（例如，“你妈妈帮你记住了吗？”）。这样的问题对孩子来说可能特别具有挑战性，他们可能会从字面上解释陈述，误解建议的含义。本研究的目的是检查和分类律师如何询问暗示性影响和真实性。我们想了解律师如何巧妙地指控暗示性影响，以及这种情况发生的频率。我们假设间接指控暗示性影响的问题很常见，而且辩护律师会比检察官提出更微妙的问题，更少公开的问题。我们审查了检察官和辩护律师对 64 名儿童就涉嫌儿童性虐待作证提出的 7,103 行提问。我们发现，在所有律师的提问中，有 9% 的问题涉及暗示性影响或真实性。其中大部分（66%）是间接指控。暗示性影响的间接指控涵盖了一系列微妙之处和主题，包括解决对话影响（例如，辅导）、偶然影响（例如，目睹虐待）等。我们还发现，与检察官相比，辩护律师不太可能公开询问暗示性影响和真实性。我们得出的结论是，律师通常以微妙的方式询问暗示性影响和真实性，发育中的儿童可能难以理解，即使指控属实，这也可能导致对影响的肯定。我们还发现，与检察官相比，辩护律师不太可能公开询问暗示性影响和真实性。我们得出的结论是，律师通常以微妙的方式询问暗示性影响和真实性，发育中的儿童可能难以理解，即使指控属实，这也可能导致对影响的肯定。我们还发现，与检察官相比，辩护律师不太可能公开询问暗示性影响和真实性。我们得出的结论是，律师通常以微妙的方式询问暗示性影响和真实性，发育中的儿童可能难以理解，即使指控属实，这也可能导致对影响的肯定。