Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDando, Coral J.*
dc.contributor.authorOrmerod, Thomas C.*
dc.contributor.authorCooper, Penny*
dc.contributor.authorMarchant, Ruth*
dc.contributor.authorMattison, Michelle L. A.*
dc.contributor.authorMilne, Rebecca*
dc.contributor.authorBull, Ray*
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-25T11:28:55Z
dc.date.available2018-01-25T11:28:55Z
dc.date.issued2018-02-13
dc.identifier.citationDando, C. J., Ormerod, T. C., Cooper, P., Marchant, R., Mattison, M. L. A., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2018). No evidence against Sketch Reinstatement of Context, Verbal Labels or the use of Registered Intermediaries for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Response to Henry et al. (2017). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(7), 2593-2596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3479-zen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10803-018-3479-z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/620818
dc.descriptionThe final publication is available at Springer via https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3479-z
dc.description.abstractRecently, Henry et al. (2017) found no evidence for the use of Verbal labels, Sketch Reinstatement of Context and Registered Intermediaries by forensic practitioners when interviewing children with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder. We consider their claims, noting the limited ecological validity of the experimental paradigm, the impacts of repeated interviewing where retrieval support is not provided at first retrieval, question the interviewer/intermediary training and their population relevant experience, and comment on the suppression of population variances. We submit that rejecting these techniques on the basis of this study is completely unwarranted and potentially damaging, particularly if used in legal proceedings to undermine the value of testimony from children with ASD, who continually struggle to gain access to justice.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringer Verlagen
dc.relation.urlhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10803-018-3479-zen
dc.subjectSketch reinstatement of contexten
dc.subjectRegistered Intermediaryen
dc.subjectAutism spectrum disorderen
dc.subjectDrawingen
dc.titleNo evidence against Sketch Reinstatement of Context, Verbal Labels or the use of Registered Intermediaries for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Response to Henry et al. (2017)en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.eissn1573-3432
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Westminster; University of Sussex; City, University of London; Triangle Services; University of Chester; University of Portsmouth; University of Derbyen
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Autism and Developmental Disordersen
dc.date.accepted2017-12-08
or.grant.openaccessYesen
rioxxterms.funderUnfundeden
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUnfundeden
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-02-13
html.description.abstractRecently, Henry et al. (2017) found no evidence for the use of Verbal labels, Sketch Reinstatement of Context and Registered Intermediaries by forensic practitioners when interviewing children with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder. We consider their claims, noting the limited ecological validity of the experimental paradigm, the impacts of repeated interviewing where retrieval support is not provided at first retrieval, question the interviewer/intermediary training and their population relevant experience, and comment on the suppression of population variances. We submit that rejecting these techniques on the basis of this study is completely unwarranted and potentially damaging, particularly if used in legal proceedings to undermine the value of testimony from children with ASD, who continually struggle to gain access to justice.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Author version No Evidence JADD ...
Size:
73.20Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Author version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record