Golding, J.M., Sanchez, R.P. & Sego, S.A. (1997). The believability of hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 299-325.

1. Background Info.

1. Children and Hearsay - "Myers (1992, p.34) states that a child's words are hearsay if: (1) a child's words were intended by the child to describe something that happened; and (2) the child's words were spoken prior to the court proceeding at which the words are repeated by someone who heard the child speak; and (3) the child's words are offered in court to prove that what the child said actually happened."
2. Cases of Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) - Hearsay is an important source of evidence in such cases because there are often no other witnesses and there may be certain cases (i.e. illness, refusal, loss of memory) in which the child is unable to testify in court.
3. In Maryland v. Craig (1990) the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of hearsay in CSA cases, ruling that the possibility of further trauma to the child outweighs the defendant's right to face his accuser.
4. Types of Hearsay Exceptions (as grouped by McGough, 1994)

1. "Presumptively Reliable" - characteristics of the hearsay indicate that it is most likely trustworthy and thus the "declarant" need not be present in court.

1. Examples include statements to physicians, written records, and "excited utterances."
2. An excited utterance is "a statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition"

1. Hearsay by "Necessity" - the declarant is not available for testimony in court
2. "Residual" Exceptions - miscellaneous excuses for letting someone else testify on behalf of the declarant.

1. Problems with Previous Research

1. Lack of extensive research on hearsay testimony in CSA cases
2. Existing studies often use testimony of both a hearsay witness and the alleged victim -> unclear whether hearsay testimony alone will have an impact

1. This Study

1. Purpose: to investigate the believability of hearsay testimony in the absence of the alleged victim by investigating the excited utterance hearsay exception
2. Conditions

1. "Child" - alleged victim testifies
2. "Hearsay" - adult (i.e. mother or teacher) hearsay witness testifies, child does not
3. "Victim and the Adult Hearsay" - self-explanatory
4. "No-Witness" - control

1. Hypotheses

1. Hearsay testimony should be believed more than no-witness (i.e. equal to victim's testimony)
2. There will be a main effect of age of alleged victim with believability of hearsay witness (i.e. a 6 year old will be rated more credible than a 14 year old according to prior research)
3. Jurors would be more willing to believe that a younger child would (a) disclose the incident to an adult and (b) would be less willing or able to testify in court than an older child
4. Ratings for measures of believability of incident, guilt, and guilty verdict should be higher in the hearsay condition than in the control condition.
5. Males will rate believability of the witness lower than females

1. Experiment 1

1. Method

1. Participants: 240 intro. Psych. students' data was analyzed (33 had been thrown out because they didn't pay enough attention to answer screening questions correctly)
2. Design: 4 (Testify) x 2 (Age of Victim) x 2 (Sex of Participant) between subjects factorial design; Dependent measures were believability of victim (in child and multiple conditions only), believability of the other witnesses, and outcome measure including guilt of the defendant, verdict, and prison sentence.
3. Materials: Summary of trial - Defense's case same (denies charge), Prosecution varies...

1. In all conditions, victim's cousin verifies that child had spent the night at her house
2. Child condition: testifies that uncle had sexually assaulted her
3. Hearsay condition: adult (mom or teacher) says child told of incident the morning after
4. Multiple condition: both child and hearsay testimony

1. Procedure: Participants answer questions about trial summary

1. Rate likelihood of guilt (1-10 scale)
2. Verdict
3. Recommended sentence in # of years
4. Indicate whether they believed the incident had occurred
5. Rate how much they believed each individual who testified (1-10 scale)
6. Incidental recall of summary (showed no interesting results)

1. Results

1. Testify: significant main effect p<.001
2. Sex of Participant: significant main effect p<.001
3. Type of Judgment: significant main effect p<.001
4. Believability - victim and hearsay witness believed to some degree

1. Alleged victim - significant main effects for Sex of Participant (p<.05) and significant interaction b/n Sex of Participant and Age of Victim (p<.05) -> females believed the 6 year old more than males but both believed the 14 year old about the same
2. Hearsay witness - significant main effect of Sex of Participant (p<.01), significant interaction between Sex of Participant and Age of Victim (p<.05) - same gender patterns as above
3. Cousin - significant main effect of Testify (p<.01) - more believable in hearsay, child, and multiple conditions than in no witness condition (all significant) - no different in hearsay, child, or multiple conditions; again, females believe cousin more
4. Defendant - significant main effect of Testify (p<.01), rated less believable in child, hearsay, and multiply conditions than in no witness condition; females rated him less believable

1. Outcome Measures

1. Believe Incident - Significant effects of Testify and Sex of Participant (p<.001) - same pattern of witness believability - males were slightly less willing to believe incident than females
2. Guilt Ratings - Significant main effect of Testify (p<.01) - same pattern; Significant main effect of Sex of Participant (p<.01); females rate more guilty
3. Verdict - Testify and Sex of Participant were significant predictors; males less likely to find guilty
4. Sentence - Significant main effect of Age = more likely to give longer sentence when child is younger

1. Experiment 2 - basically the same with hearsay under excited utterance condition, a male hearsay witness, and a 4 year old victim

1. Method - Design is similar with added level of Age, no Multiple condition, rating of Believability of victim even if she didn't testify
2. Results: Significant main effects for: Testify, Sex of Participant, Type of Judgment; Interaction of Sex x Age, Type of Judgment x Age, and Type of Judgment x Sex