In My Shoes: Interactive computer assisted interview - BASPCAN Belfast 2012 www.inmyshoes.org.uk
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
In My Shoes: Interactive computer assisted
interview
BASPCAN
Belfast 2012
www.inmyshoes.org.uk
www.childandfamilytraining.org.uk
Bill Joyce & David Glasgow
Child & Family Training
• Developed over last 23 years • Original ‘pump priming’ grant from Liverpool University in 1989 • Development funded by DoH grant for 6 years • Supported (2002-2004) by the Instone Bloomfield Charitable Trust • IMS training organised by Child and Family Training (York), a not-for-profit organisation running training for the DCSF evidence based assessment tools.
Messages from Serious Case
Reviews
“One overarching theme dominates-the
enduring problem of the child being lost.
The theme of children not being seen or
heard is a feature of most studies of SCRs”
• Children insufficiently consulted or spoken
to
• Siblings not interviewed
• Not around or kept out of sight
• Chose not to or were unable to speak.
(Understanding Serious Case Reviews and their impact DfE
2009)
Messages from Serious Case Reviews “Above all, previous Ofsted reports have identified that too often the focus on the child was lost; adequate steps were not taken to establish the views and wishes and feelings of children and young people, and their voice was not heard” • Child not seen frequently enough and not asked • Professionals prevented from seeing and listening to children • Focus too much on needs of the parents • Findings poorly interpreted. “The voice of the child: Learning Lessons from SCRs (Ofsted April 2011)
Having a Say in What Happens
How often children are asked their opinion on things that matter
Always 28%
Usually 29%
Sometimes 29%
Not usually 10%
Never 4%
How much difference children’s opinions make
Always 20%
Usually 34%
Sometimes 31%
Not usually 10%
Never 5%
Little change from 2008 monitor
Children’s Care Monitor 2011 (Ofsted 2012)
Principles in development of In My Shoes • Simplicity. The program should be simple to use for child and adult. • Enjoyment. The package should be fun and interesting for children and help establish rapport with the interviewer. • Three way communication. The interview process is a three way process between the child, computer
Principles in development Forensic considerations • One intended use of the In My Shoes is in interviewing where abuse is suspected. • The quality of information gathering and recording has to be acceptable in court. • There should be no risk of the child being exposed to any images or questioning that might lead or disturb the child or vulnerable adult.
Principles in development Tamper proof record • All responses on the computer are logged by the program, providing a time and date stamped record of the session. • Scenes created during In My Shoes sessions can be printed out and used as a basis for further assessment and therapeutic help. • Text and drawings can be inserted and recorded.
Principles in development Interface: speech and signing. • The facilitation of communication with people where spoken language is difficult. • Program can potentially be delivered in any language. • Program enables the use of different guides e.g. from different ethnic minority groups, using different languages, or augmented communication techniques e.g. SSE - Signed Spoken English
Goals of In My Shoes • To develop a computer assisted interviewing package enabling very young and disabled children to communicate abuse experiences • To reinforce collaborative, external focus of attention • To continue development of symbolic representation of objects & abstractions in symbol supported interview
Symbol Supported Interview is nothing new:
The explicit and agreed use of any object, not as itself, but
as a representation for something else which is typically
either not present or intangibleBritish CP (Child) use of free drawing
Bekhit et al (2005)
Never
Occasionally
Moderately
Frequently
Always 18%
12%
18%
36%
15%The Venerable FRT
The youthful SCARF
Scenotest (Hogrefe)
The Oucher Pain Scale
www.oucher.orgMakaton Faces
IMS: Iterative, small/single N development
methodology
Develop
Elicit
Develop paper Paper computer
communicative
symbol prototype procedure
drawings from
prototype testing prototype
children
Computer
prototype
Revision testing
Feedback & Distributed Integration
feature to team & into IMS
requests users Application• Examples of initial drawings
Critical triad for secure use of symbols
(From empirical literature)
1. Dual Representation
2. Symbolic Stability
3. Communicative IntentSymbols & Communicative Intent:
DeLoache 2004
Balloon Lollipop
Experimenter
ChildMore detail is sometimes better.. (Allen et al 2010)
But young children value prototypicality over detail
Allen et al 2010
Figures on right
selected by children to
be symbols of verbal
categoryOur own brush with too much detail
… 3D symbols better behind glass
DeLoache (2000)
DeLoache used a model
room to show young
children where a toy was
hidden in a real room with
identical layout.
A glass fronted model lead
to greater success -
measured by child finding
toy in real room.Thought bubbles enable young
children and children with autism to
not only pass false-belief tests, but
also related theory of mind tests
...and enhance the distinction
and links between thoughts,
emotions and beliefs
Speech bubbles create
“slow throwness”*
Bubble Dialogue - McMahonFacets of symbolic representations
• Physical context/setting
• People
• Affect
• Sensations/pain
• Speech
• Thought
+
• Post Hoc interpretation/processing
i.e., messages about above.IMS symbolic representations
Emotions
Thoughts & Speech
People
Narrative &
Conversation
Messages
Places
SensationsMary the guide, and the people chooser
British Sign Language Guide
The emotions module
The somatic experiences module
This Much! iPad Interactive visual analogue scale
This Much! iPad Interactive visual analogue scale
This Much! Interactive visual analogue scale in use
(5 year old girl)Oliver: Use of emotion symbols
Oliver: Don’t interrupt the guide!
Use with an adult
And a teenager with ASD
Excerpts from a results file (real cases)
4 ½ year old girl’s symbolic representations of
injuries & fatal blow to her 18 month old sibling
“He had them all over” He just went like that!
(q) (gesture punch)
“I could see them when his
nappy was changed”Somatic experiences described by a boy (6)
‘Wizzered
Punched ’ by Sam
at school
‘Wee’
started
burning
Fell on
barbed wire ‘Hurt’ by
sam
Mum trapped
my toe in
Kitchen door by
accidentMessage: ======== He done funny things that scared me. Not slapped me. That don’t scare me. (?)Just funny things that scared me. I don’t want to see him no more. Not even for £5.
Private Law contact dispute: 4 ½ old girl
“Sometimes he shouts at me
and I did feel really scared. I
told my mum he has a baby
dragon in his tummy
because he's so big. He
doesn't really, I just said it.”
“Dad, I want to stay with my
mummy and come to your
house and play and my mum
come to pick me up and go
back home”Private Law contact dispute, 7 year old child from ‘EBD’ school
“marks came on my
back from his hands
i don't remember
any of that but my
mum said it.”10 year old girl with very significant learning
disability & ADD10 year old girl with very significant learning disability & ADD
Symbol Supported narratives
Routine Distress
[Brother is] pestering nan
“My mums tooken tiger to swearing at us and stuff,
vets he spewed up. Hes got a makes no…. ….can’t say it.
tablet one a day and one a [Clearly uncomfortable &
night” embarrassed]
uyyyyjjjjjkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkto
jr;r [sound of ‘cat spewing’]
Veracity of routine narrative adds confidence to distress related narrative7 year old girl interviewed re neglect
In My Shoes: Interactive computer assisted
interview
BASPCAN
Belfast 2012
www.inmyshoes.org.uk
www.childandfamilytraining.org.uk
Bill Joyce & David Glasgow
Child & Family TrainingYou can also read
