The influence of recantation, witness demeanor, and expert testimony on child witness credibility in sexual abuse prosecutions

Two factors have been shown to influence witness credibility and trial outcome in child sexual abuse prosecutions: (a) the demeanor of the child witness, and (b) the testimony of experts regarding the reactions of children to sexual abuse. A third factor, (c) child witness inconsistency (recantation) has been presumed to be similarly influential. The present study evaluated the effects of these three factors on witness credibility and trial outcome. A national sample of 272 jury eligible participants read trial summaries portraying a child sexual abuse (CSA) prosecution in which a 10-year-old girl accused her stepfather of sexual abuse. All trial summaries included testimony from the victim, the victim's mother, the defendant, and a social worker. Child victim witness inconsistency (the presence or absence of a pretrial, reaffirmed recantation), child witness demeanor (the child displayed a calm demeanor, or appeared hesitant and tearful during testimony), and expert psychological testimony (expert testimony delivered in rebuttal to the defense's child-credibility challenges, or testimony delivered by the child during the prosecution's re-direct, in rebuttal to the defense's child credibility challenges), was varied in a between-subjects design to test 4 hypotheses. Participants' voted for guilt or innocence, rated witness credibility, expert knowledgeability and the strength of the prosecution's case. Results highlighted the negative influence of child victim-witness inconsistency, but failed to support hypotheses about child witness demeanor, or the usefulness of expert psychological testimony in CSA prosecutions that have been complicated by a child victim's inconsistent pretrial statements. Juror characteristics and personal history also emerged as significant influences on percipient witness credibility and trial outcome.