CHAP 4 (Deception)

Question 1

Historically, belief that criminals can be caught by physical manifestations of their denials
Suspects in India once required to submit to “trial by sacred ass” (500 BC)

Answer 1

Mud put on tail of donkey in a tent
Required to enter tent and pull tail, innocent if donkey doesn’t bray
But actually had to do with whether or not the person had dirt on their hands (whether they were too scared to touch donkey or not)

Question 2

Hindus forced suspects to chew rice and spit it out on leaf from an ancient tree

Answer 2

If the rice was dry, the person is guilty

Question 3

Bedouins of Arabia required conflicting witnesses to lick a hot iron

Answer 3

One whose tongue was burned was lying

Question 4

What do the two examples of old physical deception both with rice and hot iron on tongue reflect?

Answer 4

Sympathetic nervous system
- Salivation decreases when stressed

Question 5

Stress levels and emotion aren’t always ________ to lying

Answer 5

completely causal to lying

Question 6

Developed in 1917 by William Marston
Called it the “lie detector”
Noting increases in systolic blood pressure when person lies
“Made Wonder Woman”

Answer 6

Polygraph

Question 7

Polygraph measures _______, and in the body measures __________

Answer 7

It measures emotions, not “lying”
May or may not be related
“Poly” multiple measures
Measures blood pressure, heart rate, breathing rate, galvanic skin response, etc

Question 8

Anything Better? Than Polygraph

Answer 8

Concealed Information Test / Guilty Knowledge (Lykken, 1981)

Question 9

• Goal is to detect presence of guilty knowledge in person’s mind, not lying
• Relies on accumulation of facts known only by police, criminal, surviving victims
• “In what room was the body found?” / “What was the murder weapon”

Answer 9

Concealed Information Test / Guilty Knowledge (Lykken, 1981)

Question 10

Start with the baseline “lie” (have you ever told a lie?)
Other responses can be compared to it

Answer 10

Comparison Question / Control Question (Reid 1947)

Question 11

Polygraph Conclusions

Answer 11

Can be very useful to get suspect to confess
A “confession inducing” technique (similar to the REID)

- Not the machine, but suspect’s beliefs DECIDE WHO IS GUILTY
Rapport is key

Question 12

Brain Scan Techniques of Deception

FLAWS?????

Answer 12

Brain Fingerprinting (guilty knowledge with technology by measuring brain fMRI)

“Brain Wave Science” (ERP Research; p300 amplitude)

fMRI Research (Langleben 2001)
18 men. Sizable activity in some areas when lying about cards

IMPOSSIBLE TO IMPLEMENT DUE TO COSTS AND TIME NEEDED
18 MEN ALONE TOOK MONTHS JUST TO TELL THEY WERE LYING ABOUT CARDS

Question 13

Nonverbal Communication in Deception

Answer 13

Idea is that non verbal “leakages” are harder to conceal
Facial Expressions (shortly)
E.g; decreases in limb movements are believe to be indicative of deception

Non-Verbal Cues:
Never used as evidence in court
Still useful (e.g customs inspector)
For mixed messages
Non-verbal usually better indicator (harder to control)
List from OPP
Nodding, foot and hand movements (maybe)

Question 14

Pretty much all forms of Nonverbal Communication cues to decept decpetion are ___________________

Answer 14

Never used as evidence in court

Question 15

Polygraphs are not allowed in the use of _____ in Canada or the US

Answer 15

Courts

Question 16

Approaches to using ANY deception cues in court

Answer 16

Using this evidence in court

U.S Rules of evidence (and Canada R v Mohan)
Frye (1923) “general acceptance” rule
Replaced Frye WITH Daubert (1993)
“ A conclusion will qualify as scientific knowledge if the proponent can demonstrate that it is the product of sound “scientific methodology” derived from the scientific method”
Up to judges to decide what is “valid science”
Comes down to the “common sense” idea and invading the purview of the jury

Question 17

Paul Eckman (1985) Telling Lies

Answer 17

“Lying is when one person intends to mislead another, doing so deliberately, without prior notification of this purpose, and without having been explicitly asked to do so (p.28)

Question 18

In Paul Eckmans research, the Brokaw Hazard

Answer 18

• named after Tom Brokaw
• After tons of years, he believed he was incredibly good at detecting lies
• “Convoluted answers or sophisticated evasions” - Ignores individual differences in how people respond
• Brokaws idea are unfounded

Question 19

• “Convoluted answers or sophisticated evasions” that are supposed to catch deception but Ignores individual differences in how people respond is the

Answer 19

the Brokaw Hazard

Question 20

Observing ways in which physiological responses are inconsistent with verbal accounting

Answer 20

The Leakage Hypothesis

Question 21

Behavioural Analysis in Deception

Answer 21

Analysis of “micro-expressions” (largely based on Eckmans work)

Other “Techniques”
Eye movement and Neuro Linguistic Programming
No evidence for any of this

Voice Analysis

Spectrogram - Voiceprint analysis
Voice stress and “micro-tremors” in speech pattern
Deception is correlated (SOMETIMES) with more speech disturbances, slower rate of speech, higher pitched voice, longer latency to answer (but not always!)

Cognitive Load (Vrij)
Easier to know when someone is truthful
Difficult lies take cognitive resources (so easier to detect)
But simple lies have different patterns

Not legally accepted or scientifically established

Question 22

falsification or profound exaggeration of illness (physical or mental) for a specific reason

Answer 22

Malingering

Question 23

a mother with a child that is very sick or has an ailment, just when they get home and out they go back immediately, this will give doctors an assumption that the parent is purposely poisoning the child.

or ie they will pretend they themselves are sick

Answer 23

SPECIFICALLY REGARDS MEANING OR ATTENTION / BENEFITSFROM ACTION
Munchausen / Proxy
- proxy ONLY IF FAKING ANOTHERS HEALTH NOT THEIR OWN

Question 24

Rosenhan (1973)
“On being sane in insane places”

Answer 24

8 Sane individuals went to 12 different hospitals (5 States)
All said that they had been hearing voices, and that the voices said “empty, hollow, thud”, other than this they gave no other deceitful statements (real life histories presented)
As soon as they were admitted, argued that all “symptoms” were gone
Wanted to see how long before they were detected of being fake patients, they never were
All but one admitted for “schizophrenia”, all released with “schizophrenia in remission”. Were in the hospital for 7-52 days (19 Days on Average)
Yet real patients (35/118) figured out that they were faking

Question 25

How good are we at detecting deception?

Answer 25

Okay but hardly foolproof
Efficacy versus validity is a big issue (thinking your good at is different than being - Confirmation Bias)
Just a tool?????