Method Participants
 In the current study, there were 62 subjects. There were 29 females and 33 males in the study. The participants ranged in age from 6-8 years old. They were recruited based on their enrollment in a first or second grade class at one of two Manchester area elementary schools.
Design
 A 2 (type of interviewer) X 2 (type of question) between-subjects experimental design was used. The two levels of the type of question were open-ended or leading. The two levels of the type of interviewer were perceived authority and non-authority figure.
 The subjects were presented with both an auditory stimulus (the story) and an accompanying visual stimulus (pictures that coincided with events in the story). The open-ended questions began with the words, "what," "who," "where," "why," or "how." They required the child to recall on their own events or facts about the story. The leading questions contained information from the story that was either true or false. The questions were phrased in such a way that the subject merely had to answer yes or no, and did not have to add any additional input (see Appendix B).
 A between subjects manipulation of the type of interviewer was used. The perceived authority figure was dressed professionally in a black dress that resembled a suit. She wore nylons and black high heels. Her hair was in a French twist. She wore light makeup and some jewelry. Her nametag read, "Ms. Psaros." She also carried a clipboard when interacting with all subjects. The non-authority figure was dressed casually in a gray sweatshirt, jeans, and sneakers. Her hair was in a ponytail and she wore no makeup. Her nametag read, "Christina," and she did not carry a clipboard.
 The non-authority figure introduced herself to the subjects by explaining that she had to do a project for school and she would be playing with them for a little while. The authority figure introduced herself to the subjects by explaining that she was working on a project and she would be working with them for a little while. The same experimenter was used in all conditions.
Materials
 The consent form was administered to parents one month prior to the start of the study. It outlined basic goals and procedures of the study. It also encouraged the parent/ guardian to contact the experimenter with any questions or concerns (See Appendix A). Children gave verbal assent just before they participated.
  The auditory component of the study was a story taken from the Bonn Test of Statement Suggestibility (see Appendix B).
 The visual component was also taken from the Bonn Test of Statement Suggestibility (See Appendix B). There were four pictures shown in sequence with the story. The interviewer had a sheet of paper with the appropriate questions on it. Each subject was asked 15 questions designed for the appropriate experimental condition (See Appendix B).
 Subjects also engaged in a distraction task. They were given a blank piece of paper and 24 crayons. They were instructed to draw their favorite food. While drawing, they listened to a compact disc of "Disney’s Greatest Hits" on a portable CD player.
 When the questioning was complete, the subjects were debriefed. Subjects were informed as to the purpose of the study. Subjects were also assured that some of the questions were hard to answer, but that he or she did an excellent job. Subjects were told that their teacher would not be testing them on the activities completed and asked not to discuss what they did during the study with their peers until the study was over.
 Subjects were given a debriefing form to take home to their parents/ guardians. It described the study in fuller detail, namely what the experimenter was hoping to find and how their child participated. It also encouraged parents/ guardians to contact the experimenter for a copy of the study or with any further questions (See Appendix C).
Procedure
 Consent for the study took place in two forms. Written consent from the potential participants’ parents/guardians was received one month prior to testing. Verbal assent was received from each subject just before their actual participation in the study while walking to the testing area.
 The subjects were informed of their participation by their teachers on the day testing began. She explained to them that someone from St. Anselm would be completing an activity with some of them, and if they wanted, they could participate. She then told them what the activity entailed: listening to a story, coloring, and answering some questions.
The experimenter went to each subjects’ classroom to bring them to the testing site.  While walking to the testing site, there was a brief rapport building phase in which the experimenter asked how the subjects were doing and inquired about their Halloween plans and activities.
Due to space limitation within each school, subjects were tested in one of four areas. In school A, subjects were either tested in an executive conference room or in a smaller room devoted to the reading specialist. In school B, subjects were either tested in a corner of the library or in a hallway just outside of the library. All testing areas consisted of a table and four chairs.
Subjects were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions. Testing occurred between the hours of 8:45 a.m. and 1:45 p.m. on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. The experimenter visited each school for a total of four days. Subjects were tested in pairs and met with the experimenter only once.
Subjects were brought to the testing area and instructed to sit in chairs. They were read the procedure: "I am going to tell you a story now, and you should try to remember it. I have told this story to a quite small child yesterday, and that child understood it quite well. Afterwards, I would like to see how well you can remember that story. I am also going to show you some pictures so you can better understand the story. Look at them closely!"
The children listened to a previously recorded version of the story that was identical for all groups. The pictures were shown at the appropriate time, with the previous ones remaining on the table.
After the subjects heard the story, one child remained at the table to engage in a distraction task, while the other one went to the other side of the room to be interviewed by the experimenter.
The child being interviewed continued to hear the procedure. The interviewer asked the following of the subject: " Did you understand everything? Do you remember what happened? Please tell me everything just as it happened." The subject was allowed to view the pictures while they gave the initial free recall. When appropriate, the experimenter asked, " What else happened? Then what happened?" When the subject could not remember anything else, he or she switched positions with the other subject.
After the initial free recall was completed, subject number one was joined with the experimenter again. The following instructions were given, "I am sure you remember the story you heard a few minutes ago about that duck. Now I would like to find out how much you still remember of what you heard. I am going to ask you some questions to see if you remember that story very well." The subject was the asked the 15 questions appropriate to their condition. When questioning was completed, subject number one again switched places with subject number two, and the procedure was repeated.
Lastly, subject number one joined the experimenter again. The following instructions were given, "We are almost done. All I need you to do for this part is tell me everything you can remember about the story about the duck." A second free recall ensued. Subject number one then switched places with subject number two and the procedure was repeated.
After the second free recall, the subjects were reunited with each other and given an opportunity to discuss their drawings with the experimenter, debriefed, given the debriefing form to take to their parents or guardians, and walked back to class by the experimenter. The entire activity took between 20-30 minutes. Each subject was distracted for 3-5 minutes before questioning and again before the second free recall.
Scoring
The subjects answers were scored based on guidelines from the Bonn Test of Statement Suggestibility and by the experimenter’s own method. The story was broken down into 43 different facts or ideas. A point was awarded for each idea the subject was able to recall. Since the experimenter created the open-ended questions, a unique method of scoring was used. Any answer that had a valid element either from the story or the pictures and that answered the question was given a point as being correct. For example, for the question, "What did Michaela tell her parents?" acceptable answers would be, "Nothing" or "she broke the duck." While Michaela did not explicitly tell her parents anything, it can be inferred that she said something because in the story her father fixes the duck.
In the leading question conditions, there were five questions containing correct information, so when the subject answered those questions in the affirmative, a point was awarded for being correct. The remaining ten questions were questions containing false information and an affirmative answer would be incorrect. Points were only awarded when the subject answered the question in the negative.
There was also a measure of shift included in the questions. Five questions were repeated to the subject after they answered the question initially. The intent was to measure any interaction that existed between the conditions and doubt in the subjects’ own assessment of their initial answers. If the subject changed his or her answer, a point was given as a shift.
After the interview was over, the subjects were thanked and debriefed. A debriefing statement that expressed appreciation to the parent or guardian was sent home with each subject. The subjects were then walked back to their classrooms by the experimenter.