Award Date

1-1-2001

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Special Education

First Committee Member

Rebecca Nathanson

Number of Pages

78

Abstract

Children with mental retardation are more likely to be abused than the general population, yet are often denied access to the justice system. Research on children without mental retardation has revealed skepticism as to their reliability as witnesses in the court of law. Even more so, children with mental retardation face the issue of credibility because of their age and disability. The purpose of this study is to assess attorneys' perceptions of child witnesses with mental retardation. Thirty-nine criminal attorneys completed a 33-item questionnaire designed to assess their opinions of the abilities of adults, and children with and without mental retardation to recall and communicate information in the forensic context. Results revealed that attorneys perceived child witnesses as less credible and more suggestible than adult witnesses. Moreover, analyses indicated that child witnesses with mental retardation were also perceived as less credible and more suggestible than child witnesses without mental retardation.

Keywords

Attorneys; Child; Mental; Perceptions; Retardation; Witnesses

Controlled Subject

Special education; Social service; Political science; Public policy; Law

File Format

pdf

File Size

1832.96 KB

Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Language

English

Permissions

If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have the full text removed from Digital Scholarship@UNLV, please submit a request to digitalscholarship@unlv.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.

Identifier

https://doi.org/10.25669/va36-22wr


Share

COinS