Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future

This article provides an overview of verbal lie detection research. This type of research began in the 1970s with examining the relationship between deception and specific words. We briefly review this initial research. In the late 1980s, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) emerged, a veracity assessment tool containing a list of verbal criteria. This was followed by Reality Monitoring (RM) and Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), two other veracity assessment tools that contain lists of verbal criteria. We discuss their contents, theoretical rationales, and ability to identify truths and lies. We also discuss similarities and differences between CBCA, RM, and SCAN. In the mid 2000s, ‘Interviewing to deception’ emerged, with the goal of developing specific interview protocols aimed at enhancing or eliciting verbal veracity cues. We outline the four most widely researched interview protocols to date: the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), Verifiability Approach (VA), Cognitive Credibility Assessment (CCA), and Reality Interviewing (RI). We briefly discuss the working of these protocols, their theoretical rationales and empirical support, as well as the similarities and differences between them. We conclude this article with elaborating on how neuroscientists can inform and improve verbal lie detection

Art as a Means to Disrupt Routine Use of Space

This paper examines the publicly visible aspects of counter-terrorism activity in pedestrian spaces as mechanisms of disruption. We discuss the objectives of counter-terrorism in terms of disruption of routine for both hostile actors and general users of public spaces, categorising the desired effects as 1) triangulation of attention; 2) creation of unexpected performance; and 3) choreographing of crowd flow. We review the potential effects of these existing forms of disruption used in counter-terrorism. We then present a palette of art, advertising, architecture, and entertainment projects that offer examples of the same disruption effects of triangulation, performance and flow. We conclude by reviewing the existing support for public art in counter-terrorism policy, and build on the argument for art as an important alternative to authority. We suggest that while advocates of authority-based disruption might regard the playfulness of some art as a weakness, the unexpectedness it offers is perhaps a key strengt

Memory development: implications for adults recalling childhood experiences in the courtroom

Adults frequently provide compelling, detailed accounts of early childhood experiences in the courtroom. Judges and jurors are asked to decide guilt or innocence based solely on these decades-old memories using 'common sense' notions about memory. However, these notions are not in agreement with findings from neuroscientific and behavioural studies of memory development. Without expert guidance, judges and jurors may have difficulty in properly adjudicating the weight of memory evidence in cases involving adult recollections of childhood experiences

Telling lies:The irrepressible truth?

Telling a lie takes longer than telling the truth but precisely why remains uncertain. We investigated two processes suggested to increase response times, namely the decision to lie and the construction of a lie response. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were directed or chose whether to lie or tell the truth. A colored square was presented and participants had to name either the true color of the square or lie about it by claiming it was a different color. In both experiments we found that there was a greater difference between lying and telling the truth when participants were directed to lie compared to when they chose to lie. In Experiments 3 and 4, we compared response times when participants had only one possible lie option to a choice of two or three possible options. There was a greater lying latency effect when questions involved more than one possible lie response. Experiment 5 examined response choice mechanisms through the manipulation of lie plausibility. Overall, results demonstrate several distinct mechanisms that contribute to additional processing requirements when individuals tell a lie

Partners in crime: How liars in collusion betray themselves

The paradigmatic task for participants in studies on deception is to assess veracity on the basis of a single statement. However, in applied contexts, lie catchers are often faced with multiple statements (reported by one or several suspects). To appreciate this mismatch, we conducted a study where each member of 10 truth-telling pairs and 10 lying pairs (reporting fabricated alibis) was interrogated twice about an alibi. As predicted, lying pair members were more consistent between themselves than were truth-telling pair members, and single liars and truth tellers were equally consistent over time. Furthermore, truth tellers made more commissions than did liars. Although in line with our repeat vs. reconstruct hypothesis, these findings contrast sharply with beliefs held by professional lie catchers and recommendations found in literature on deception detection. The results are translated into an applied psycholegal context

Increased realism in eyewitness confidence judgements: The effect of dyadic collaboration

This study investigated to what extent, and under what circumstances, pair collaboration influences the realism in eyewitness confidence in event memory. The participants first saw a short film clip and then confidence rated their answers to questions on its content. A condition (the Individual-Pair condition) where individual effort preceded pair collaboration showed better calibration compared with a condition (the Simple Pair condition) where no individual effort took place. Furthermore, within the Individual-Pair condition, better calibration, and lower overconfidence, were found in the pair phase compared with the individual phase. The eyewitnesses in the Individual-Pair condition made more realistic judgements of the total number of questions answered correctly. In a control experiment no effect on realism in confidence was found when individuals performed the same task twice. The improved realism in the Individual-Pair condition may partly be explained in terms of the increased accuracy and lowered confidence found for such items where the pair members' had given different answers in the individual phase, and by a risky shift effect for such items where they had given the same answer. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd

The Cognitive Interview and its effect on witnesses' confidence

Today there is ample evidence that the Cognitive Interview (CI) enhances witnesses' memory. However, less is known about how the CI affects eyewitnesses' confidence. To address this shortcoming we conducted a study analyzing how realism in confidence was affected by the CI. All participants (n = 79) were first shown a filmed kidnapping. After 2 weeks we interviewed one-third of the participants according to the guidelines of the CI, one-third according to a Standard Interview (SI), and one-third were not interviewed at all (Control condition). Participants in all three conditions were then asked to answer 45 forced-choice questions, and to give a confidence judgment after each choice. For the 45 questions, no differences in accuracy were found between the three conditions. Confidence was higher in the CI and SI conditions, compared with the Control condition. CI and SI did not differ in metacognitive realism but both showed lower realism compared with the Control condition, although only CI significantly so. The results indicate that the inflation in confidence is more likely to be explained in terms of a reiteration effect, than as a consequence of the particular mnemonics characterizing the CI (e.g. "mental reinstatement of context"). In sum, CI does not seem to impair (or improve) the realism in witnesses' confidence, and does not inflate confidence in erroneous recall, compared to a SI

Suspicious minds: Criminals' ability to detect deception

This study is a quasi-experiment focusing on the deception detection ability of prison inmates (n = 52) and college students (n = 52). Participants made veracity judgments of videotaped statements of witnesses either lying or telling the truth about an event. In line with findings on criminals' beliefs about cues to deception, it was predicted that prison inmates would outperform students in terms of lie detection accuracy. Our hypothesis received partial support since the prison inmates outperformed the students in terms of detecting lies, but not in terms of detecting truths. Moreover, the prison inmates achieved an accuracy level higher than chance, while students did not. Furthermore, prison inmates had a pronounced lie bias. It is possible that the outcome feedback provided in the environment of criminals may explain the differences in accuracy levels between prison inmates and students. It is suggested that relevant outcome feedback may be a beneficial component in training of professional lie-catchers in order to improve their performance