Detecting Lies - Vrijj & Mann

Question 1

Aim of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 1

Test police officers ability to distinguish lies and truths during police interviews with suspects

Question 2

Method of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 2

Field Experiment

Question 3

Participants of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 3

99 Kent police officers (24f and 75m) mean age 34

• 78 detectives
• 4 traffic response
• 8 were trainers
• 9 uniformed response

Question 4

Procedure of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 4

Showed clips of 14 suspects showing their head and torso so that expression and movement were visible

• Officers began questionnaire about experiencing in detecting lies
• Had to state whether they thought suspect was telling the truth or lie. State how confident they were about decision
• Finally asked to list the cues they used t detect the lie

Question 5

Results of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 5

• Accuracy for picking truth or lie had no significant difference
• More experienced had greater accuracy at detecting both truth or lie
• Most frequent cue to detect lying was gaze

Question 6

Conclusions of Vrijj & Mann

Answer 6

• More experience, better at detecting lies
• Good lie detectors rely on story cues
• Police officers can detect lies above the level of chance, but focus on the wrong cues