An Assessment Of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Experience And Training On Mock Jurors’ Decisions In A Child Sexual Abuse Trial

The positive impact of sexual assault nurse examiners (SANEs) in sexual abuse cases and trials is demonstrated throughout the literature. Research shows that SANEs are perceived as more credible experts than non-specialized registered nurses and help increase conviction rates. The primary goal of the current study was to extend these findings by examining factors about SANEs as professionals that may contribute to their positive influence in court. The current study focused on the role of expert training and years of professional experience based on research illustrating the importance of these variables to jurors’ perceptions of expert credibility. A 2 (Training: SANE, registered nurse) x 2 (Experience: 1 year, 7 years) between-subjects factorial design was used. As predicted, due to their more extensive training, SANEs were perceived as more credible experts than RNs in a child sexual abuse trial. High- versus low-experience experts were also judged as more credible. In addition, the cumulative effect of high-experience SANEs on credibility ratings was significantly greater relative to each of the other combinations. Contrary to predictions, conviction rates did not vary by training nor experience. Potential reasons as to why this occurred are discussed, in addition to the legal implications of the expert-credibility findings.