Premium
When a different perspective and contextual knowledge change the conclusions: Commentary on Baugerud et al. (2020)
Author(s) -
Melinder Annika,
Magnusson Mikaela,
Ask Karl,
Gilstrap Livia,
Landström Sara
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
applied cognitive psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.719
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1099-0720
pISSN - 0888-4080
DOI - 10.1002/acp.3763
Subject(s) - norwegian , perspective (graphical) , psychology , interview , interpretation (philosophy) , cognitive interview , cognition , social psychology , epistemology , law , political science , psychiatry , philosophy , linguistics , programming language , artificial intelligence , computer science
Summary In this commentary, we raise concerns about potential methodological shortcomings in a recent paper by Baugerud et al. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 2020, 34 , 654–663, which threaten the validity and the interpretative power of the original authors' conclusions. Our concerns relate to (a) the use of a scoring system that fails to account for how children's legal rights have been implemented in the Norwegian legal system; (b) the failure to acknowledge the legal and ethical rationales behind the use of specific procedures in the Norwegian child interviewing model; (c) the lack of justification based on developmental theory or empirical distributions when creating age groups for statistical comparisons; and (d) the seemingly arbitrary and selective use of outcome variables to support a negative interpretation of the Norwegian interviewing model. Finally, because applied research may directly inform policy decisions, we argue that authors need to be particularly transparent with any potential conflicts of interest and have a low threshold for reporting such.