Seeking or controlling the truth? An examination of courtroom questioning practices by Canadian lawyers

The questioning practices of Canadian lawyers were examined. Courtroom examinations (N = 91) were coded for the type of utterance, the assumed purpose of the utterance, and the length of utterance. Results showed that approximately one-fifth of all utterances were classified as productive for gather...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Lively, Christopher J. (Author)
Contributors: Fahmy, Weyam ; Fallon, Laura ; Snook, Brent
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2020
In: Psychology, crime & law
Year: 2020, Volume: 26, Issue: 4, Pages: 343-366
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Courtroom questioning
Justice System
Lawyers
question types
truth-seeking
Description
Summary:The questioning practices of Canadian lawyers were examined. Courtroom examinations (N = 91) were coded for the type of utterance, the assumed purpose of the utterance, and the length of utterance. Results showed that approximately one-fifth of all utterances were classified as productive for gathering reliable information (i.e. open-ended, probing); less than one percent of all utterances were open-ended. Direct examinations contained more closed yes/no, probing, and open-ended questions. Cross-examinations contained more leading and clarification questions, and opinions. Moreover, cross- (vs. direct) examinations contained more questions with a ‘challenging the witness’ purpose. The longest utterances were opinions, followed by multiple and forced-choice questions. The longest answers were in response to open-ended questions, followed by multiple and probing questions. Implications for the truth-seeking function of the judiciary are discussed.
ISSN:1477-2744
DOI:10.1080/1068316X.2019.1669595