OBJECTIVE Tele-forensic interviews have the potential to aid investigations when children live far from interviewers, there is a risk of disease transmission, or when expertise is not locally available. However, it is unknown whether tele-forensic interviewing is an effective alternative to face-to-face interviewing, particularly for children most prone to suggestibility and lapses of attention. HYPOTHESES Previous studies suggested that school-age children would provide similar amounts of information across interview modes but provided no basis for predicting how misinformation impacts accuracy across modes or how 4- and 5-year-olds would react to tele-forensic interviewing. METHOD Children (4-8 years, N = 261, Mage = 6.42 years, 48% female) interacted with male assistants who violated a no-touching rule, parents read children a book containing misinformation about that event, and female assistants conducted interviews (usually 2 weeks after the event) face-to-face or via a video conference application. RESULTS The children were more talkative during a practice narrative phase when interviewed face-to-face rather than on screen (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.26, 95% CI [1.06, 1.51]), and 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds said more in response to open-ended prompts when interviewed face-to-face (IRR = 1.50, 95% CI [1.08, 2.09]). Children younger than 7 years also disclosed the face touch and noncompleted handshake in response to earlier and less directive prompts when interviewed face-to-face, rs(53) = .28, p = .037, and rs(48) = .33, p = .021, respectively. Children 8 years and older, however, disclosed the face touch more readily when they spoke on screen, rs(28) = -.38, p = .036, and older 7-year-olds and 8-year-olds disclosed the noncompleted handshake more readily on screen, rs(30) = -.36, p = .042. Across interview modes, children reported comparable numbers of touch events, however, and were equally accurate on challenging source-monitoring and detail questions. CONCLUSIONS Tele-forensic interviewing can be a reasonable alternative to face-to-face interviewing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

远程法医面谈可能是对儿童证人进行面对面面谈的合理替代方案。

目标 远程法医访谈有可能在儿童住在远离访谈者、存在疾病传播风险或当地没有专业知识的情况下帮助调查。然而，目前尚不清楚远程法医访谈是否是面对面访谈的有效替代方法，尤其是对于最容易受到暗示和注意力不集中的儿童而言。假设 先前的研究表明，学龄儿童会在不同的访谈模式下提供相似数量的信息，但没有提供预测错误信息如何影响不同模式的准确性或 4 岁和 5 岁儿童对远程法医访谈的反应的基础。方法 儿童（4-8 岁，N = 261，法师 = 6.42 岁，48% 女性）与违反禁止接触规则的男性助手互动，父母给孩子们读一本包含有关该事件的错误信息的书，女助理进行了面对面或通过视频会议应用程序的采访（通常在事件发生后 2 周）。结果 当面对面而不是在屏幕上接受采访时，孩子们在练习叙述阶段更健谈（发生率比 [IRR] = 1.26, 95% CI [1.06, 1.51]），4-、5-和在面对面采访时，6 岁儿童对开放式提示的回答更多（IRR = 1.50，95% CI [1.08, 2.09]）。7 岁以下的儿童在面对面采访时也披露了面部接触和未完成的握手，以响应较早和较少指示性的提示，rs(53) = .28，p = .037，和 rs(48) = .33 , p = .021，分别。但是 8 岁及以上的儿童，当他们在屏幕上说话时，更容易透露面部接触，rs(28) = -.38, p = .036，而年龄较大的 7 岁和 8 岁儿童更容易在屏幕上透露未完成的握手，rs( 30) = -.36，p = .042。然而，在各种采访模式中，儿童报告的触摸事件数量相当，并且在具有挑战性的源监控和细节问题上同样准确。结论 远程取证访谈可以作为面对面访谈的合理替代方法。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。并且在具有挑战性的源监控和细节问题上同样准确。结论 远程取证访谈可以作为面对面访谈的合理替代方法。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。并且在具有挑战性的源监控和细节问题上同样准确。结论 远程取证访谈可以作为面对面访谈的合理替代方法。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。