Publications

This Australian-first study offers insights into how judges, magistrates, tribunal and commission members assess neurodivergent witnesses’ credibility and the reliability of their testimony. It presents their opinions about overt witness behaviours or presentations that may impact the assessment of credibility and reliability. It also examines their knowledge of and attitudes towards neurodiversity. Using a cross-sectional anonymous online survey, we captured data from 23 respondent judicial and quasi-judicial officers appointed in Queensland. The results highlight that they hold positive attitudes about neurodiversity and have a desire to accommodate the needs of neurodivergent witnesses. They value being open-minded, patient, accounting for human error, accommodating difference, and looking beyond demeanour. However, some hold erroneous beliefs about some witness presentations or behaviours. This suggests that they need to know more about neurodiversity because of the risk that visible neuroatypical characteristics are negatively perceived. The implications of this risk are described, and future avenues for researchers and practitioners are discussed.

Bozin, D., Denault, V., Sullivan, K. A., Kennon, C., Cradduck, L. et Hews, R. (2026). Understanding the impact of neurodiversity on witness credibility assessment in Courts, Tribunals and Commissions. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 1-15.