Failing to keep it simple: Language use in child sexual abuse interviews with 3  8-year-old children JULIA KORKMAN, PEKKA SANTTILA, TOVE DRZEWIECKI, & N. KENNETH SANDNABBA A ˚ bo Akademi University, Department of Psychology, FIN-20 500, A ˚ bo, Finland (Received 26 September 2006; revised 20 February 2007; accepted 23 March 2007) Abstract Previous studies have found that legal interviews with children often are conducted in a language that exceeds the cognitive level of the interviewed children. In the present study, investigative interviews with 38-year-old children (n 43) in cases of suspected child sexual abuse (CSA) were analysed. Interviewers were mental health professionals working with children, and thus it was hypothesized that they would conduct the interviews using language that would be age-appropriate for the young interviewees. However, results showed that the language used included long and complex sentences, multiple questions before the child was allowed to answer, as well as unclear references to persons and situations. These were all associated with fewer details from the child and they also raise concerns about the credibility of the information gained in these interviews. Interviewers had some age sensitivity; all categories occurred more frequently in interviews with older (68 years) than with younger children (35 years), except for the unclear references. The interviewers often introduced the topic of abuse in a leading yet unclear way, and the interviews were characterized by fluctuation between on- and off-topic discussions, adding to the concerns. The issue of how to more properly and age-appropriately conduct CSA interviews needs further attention, both within research and in attempts to translate research findings into clinical practice. Keywords: Child sexual abuse investigations, forensic child interviews, interviewer utterances, language use in interviews, interview structure Introduction ‘‘Experience is the source of meaning, and what we need to keep in mind when we talk to children is that mutual experience cannot be assumed. Not with life, and not with words’’ (Walker & Warren, 1995, p. 156). The question of how children should be interviewed in legal contexts has been at the centre of much scientific interest for a number of years. There are several excellent guidebooks summarizing the relevant literature for interviewers (e.g. Aldridge & Wood, 1998; Poole & Correspondence: Julia Korkman, A ˚ bo Akademi University, Department of Psychology, FIN-20500, A ˚ bo, Finland. E-mail: Julia.Korkman@hus.fi ISSN 1068-316X print/ISSN 1477-2744 online # 2008 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/10683160701368438 Psychology, Crime & Law, January 2008; 14(1): 4160