Abused and nonabused children's memories have been found to be nearly the same in accuracy and suggestibility when the children are questioned about hypothetical sexual mistreatment, a UC Davis psychologist reports.

"This study suggests abused kids' credibility shouldn't necessarily suffer because of past abuse," says psychology professor Gail Goodman. The study was published in a recent issue of Law and Human Behavior.

"We depend on children's credibility a great deal in sexual abuse court cases -- it's critical to know how well children can remember since we don't want an innocent person going to jail."

In the study, one of the first scientific investigations of maltreated children's eyewitness memory, Goodman and four other authors report that the differences that did emerge were small. They included:

* Nonabused children were more accurate in answering specific questions;

* Abused children made more errors in identifying the unfamiliar adults in a photo identification task; and

* Younger boys who had been abused had the most trouble recalling information.

"One of the most controversial topics in the study of children's testimony is whether children are particularly suggestible in response to misleading questions," Goodman and her co-authors write. "Overall, children in our study resisted most suggestions about fictitious past events."

The study, based in Colorado, matched abused children with nonabused children of similar social/economic status, race and gender.

Goodman co-edited "Child Victims, Child Witnesses" and is an expert on children's court testimony, children's memories of traumatic events and the effects on jurors' decisions of children's out-of-court statements.