‘Eyewitness child reports = less reliable of adults’ (24)

• P1: increased suggestibility

  Children’s eyewitness testimony (EWT) may be less reliable due to increased suggestibility.
• Evi1: increased suggestibility

  Research by Puzzulo and Lindsay (1998) found that children under 5 were less accurate than adults at correctly identifying perpetrators, and children aged 5-13 were more likely to make false positives in target-absent line-ups.
• Eval1: increased suggestibility

  This suggests children are more sensitive to social cues and more likely to feel pressured to choose a suspect even when unsure. Their increased susceptibility to suggestion can distort memory accuracy, especially in high-stress or unfamiliar legal settings
• Link1: increased suggestibility

  Therefore, child witness testimony can be less reliable than adults’, especially in ambiguous or suggestive contexts.
• P2: can be accurate

  However, child witnesses can be accurate in recalling events.
• Evid2: can be accurate

  Davies et al. (1989) found that children aged 6-11 provide honest and accurate recall, especially for central details. They rarely fabricate stories and are less affected by adult suggestion than previously thought.
• Eval2: can be accurate

  This challenges the assumption that child witnesses are inherently unreliable. Additionally, Anastasi and Rhodes (2006) found age-matching improves identification accuracy, meaning children may perform better with child perpetrators.
• Link2: can be accurate

  This implies child EWT reliability depends on factors like age, question framing, and contextual reference, rather than being universally weaker than adult testimony.
• P3: memory is reconstructive

  Memory is reconstructive, and both adults and children are prone to distortion.
• Evid3: memory is reconstructive

  Schema theory suggests both age groups may misremember details to fit expectations. Yarmey (1993) found people categorise others as “good” or “bad” based on appearance, showing schema-driven recall.
• Eval3: Memory is reconstructive

  However, schema-based distortions are not exclusive to children, meaning adults are just as vulnerable in certain contexts. Furthermore, knowing the perpetrator (e.g. in cases like rape, where 90% of victims know the attacker) reduces reliance on schemas.
• Link3: memory is reconstructive

  This suggests that while reconstructive memory can distort EWT, it doesn’t affect only children - context and familiarity matter more than age alone.
• P4: emotional arousal

  Emotional arousal can both impair and enhance memory.
• Evid4: emotional arousal

  Freud argued that trauma leads to repression, explaining why victims might forget key details. But Cahill and McGaugh (1995) showed that emotional arousal (via hormones like adrenaline) can enhance memory storage.
• Eval4: emotional arousal

  Real-life studies such as Loftus and Palmer (1974) showed that memory can be manipulated post-event, but Loftus (1979b) also showed people accurately recalled central details (like a red purse). This suggests that key details, especially in highly emotional events, may be remembered well.
• Link4: emotional arousal

  Therefore, emotions may distort peripheral details but enhance central ones, meaning both children and adults may retain core memories with high accuracy depending on the nature of the crime.
• Conclusion

  While child eyewitness testimony is often viewed as less reliable due to suggestibility and false positives, research shows that under the right conditions - such as age-appropriate questioning, familiar contexts, and emotionally salient events - children can be as accurate as adults. Ultimately, EWT reliability varies more by context, questioning method, and emotional relevance than by age alone.