The role of rapport in eliciting children’s truthful reports
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children (N = 114, ages 7–13) witnessed a transgressor steal money from a wallet and then asked them to lie about the theft when interviewed by a novel interviewer. During the interview, children were asked to either describe various experienced events (Narrative Practice Rapport-building condition) or participate in an interactive activity designed to focus on the relational aspects of rapport-building including mutual attentiveness, positivity, and coordination between child and interviewer (Interactional Rapport-building condition). Children also completed a measure of rapport to indicate their subjective level of rapport with the interviewer. Older children in the Interactional Rapport-building condition were significantly more likely to be truthful, disclose the transgression earlier, and give more details. Findings provide an initial, exploratory understanding of how the rapport-building phase in eyewitness interviews may play an important role in children's disclosure decision-making and may be another area to study to promote more truthful disclosures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it