Meta-Analysis of the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol for Child Sexual Abuse Cases

Abstract

Abstract

Background: Forensic interviews are pivotal to the investigation of child sexual abuse cases. Following best practice, evidence-based guidelines when conducting such interviews is essential in obtaining a credible and reliable testimony. The investigative interview protocol developed by the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) incorporates these guidelines into a structured interview procedure. An integral part of the NICHD protocol is to promote open-ended, invitational interviewer prompts. The current research was conducted to observe the impact of the NICHD Protocol in encouraging invitational prompts and discouraging suggestive prompts when compared to non-protocol interviews.

Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of the NICHD protocol was conducted, including 11 studies selected following inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria were determined through the PICO framework. The included literature were experimental studies comparing the NICHD protocol with other structured or unstructured interview methods in interviews conducted with children in suspected cases of child sexual abuse (CSA), with a focus on assessing the quality of investigation using interviewer prompts as a dependent measure.  Electronic online databases and Registers/websites including PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, OSF, Dissertation Abstracts International, and ProQuest Dissertations and These were searched for both peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. The analysis used a random effect model that computed separate weighted mean of the effect sizes shown in independent studies for prompts namely: Directives, Option-posing, Suggestions, and Invitations.

Results: Results of the analysis indicated that overall, interviews with the NICHD protocol had less directives (g= -0.9106), option-posing (-0.9178) and suggestive prompts (g= -0.5516), and more invitational (g= 1.9859) prompts than non-protocol interviews.

Conclusion: These results corroborate with the findings of previous studies. However, these findings should be considered with caution due to the detection of high levels of heterogeneity.

Keywords: Eyewitness testimony, Investigative interviewing, Meta-analyses, Child sexual abuse, NICHD protocol, Interviewer prompt