Countering misconceptions in child sexual assault cases with judicial directions

To test the influence of a specialised judicial direction (JD) about child sexual assault (CSA) on victim credibility and verdict, a between-subjects design (JD absent vs. presented before victim testimony vs. during summing-up) was used. Non-empanelled jurors viewed a videotrial, completed a pre- and post-trial questionnaire about CSA misconceptions, and rated the complainant's credibility and defendant culpability. An interaction effect between time and experimental group revealed that jurors' CSA misconceptions increased without any treatment, and decreased only when exposed to a JD at the end of the trial. CSA knowledge predicted individual verdicts. Victim credibility mediated verdict.