The reason behind this essay has been to study if previous research is relevant for Jehovah’s Witnesses in Sweden and see if secularization has affected the organization or not. The empirical material is made from two qualitative group- interviews and open observations during two meetings in the Kingdom Hall. These studies were performed in Oskarshamn and Mönsterås during the month of February. The reason that these studies have been limited to Oskarshamn and Mönsterås is mainly because they were the only ones willing to do an interview.  According to previous research by James A. Beckfors and Andrew Holden, it has been shown that the Jehovah’s Witnesses hasn’t been affected by secularization, neither by new interpretations nor from the decrease of predicators. In my study, the interviewees have experienced secularization over the last 10-15 years while they are out preaching the religion. The organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Sweden has been setting up rules for the members to follow, such as not live together before marriage or not get tattoos. This is rules set up to keep a distance between the members and the society and therefore the organization avoid the secularization.

A growing body of research suggests that cross-examination may be detrimental to the accuracy of children�s event reports. The primary goal of the present research was to investigate three specific ways in which the negative effect of cross-examination could be reduced. Experiment 1 examined the effect of reducing the delay between the collection of the primary evidence and cross-examination. Five- and 6-year-old children (N = 76) took part in a staged event and were interviewed 1 to 2 days later. In this interview, children were asked to recall everything they could remember about the event. Children were then asked specific yes/no questions. Next, either 1 to 3 days or 8 months later, all children were interviewed for a second time in a cross-examination format. The 8-month delay was equivalent to the average delay experienced by children in New Zealand courts (Lash, 1995). The aim of the cross-examination interview was to talk the children out of their original responses, irrespective of the accuracy of their original account. Cross-examination questioning had a significant negative effect on the accuracy of children�s reports, regardless of timing. That is, children cross-examined soon after the memory event performed no better than those who were cross-examined after an 8-month delay. Furthermore, one week after cross-examination, children were interviewed again. The purpose of this interview was to establish whether children actually believed the responses they had given during cross-examination. During this interview, many children reversed what they had said during cross-examination, indicating that the responses they had given during cross-examination were due primarily to compliance to authority. Given the finding that compliance to authority played a significant role in children�s cross-examination performance in Experiment 1, Experiment 2 addressed whether a pre-interview intervention aimed to decrease compliance would reduce the negative impact of cross-examination. Five- and 6-year-old children (n = 59) and 9- and 10-year-old children (n = 62) participated in the same staged event and were interviewed for their primary evidence as in Experiment 1. Prior to the cross-examination interview, however, some children were warned that the interviewer might ask some questions which were tricky and that it was okay to tell her that she was wrong. Warning children prior to the cross-examination interview did not reduce the negative impact of cross-examination for either age group, even when the warning was delivered by the cross-examining interviewer. Experiment 3 addressed whether a more intensive pre-interview intervention could reduce the negative impact of cross-examination. Using the same experimental procedures as Experiment 2, half of the 5- and 6-year-old children (n = 77) and 9- and 10-year-old children (n = 87) received a practice and feedback session with cross-examination type questions prior to the target interview. While cross-examination still resulted in a decrease in children�s accuracy, children in the preparation condition performed significantly better than the control children. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that the negative effect of cross-examination is highly robust and that compliance appears to be the underlying mechanism responsible for this. A practice and feedback session targeting the factors that contribute to compliance reduced, but did not eliminate, the negative effect of this questioning style. Therefore, children�s accuracy may be facilitated to some extent by cross-examination preparation prior to testifying.

Thesis (MSocSc)--University of South Australia, 1997

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2006. Graduate Programme in Psychology. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 59-65). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:MR19685

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1998. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. [167]-174).

Univ., Diss--Tübingen, 2002.

Thesis (J.C.L.)--Catholic University of America, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 78-83).

Thesis (J.C.L.)--Catholic University of America, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 78-83).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1981. / Description based on print version record. Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 137-142).

Thesis (M.Sc.)--Acadia University, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 158-166). Also available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.