Investigative Interviewing IV Flashcards
Defining deception
- deception as the deliberate act of conveying false information
- A person who misremembers by accident is not lying, because lying must be an intentional act.
falsification
Nothing communicated is consistent with the truth
Distortions
Deviations from the truth that fit a goal
Exaggerations
Same as for distortion but different aim
Concealed
You know the truth but say that you don’t
Leakage hypothesis
- non-verbal cues to deception
- When you try to deceive someone, the deception leaks into physiological and behavioural changes
- i.e., changes in cardiac rates, skin conductance, gaze avoidance, facial micro-expressions etc.
- When research focuses on non-verbal cues to deception, it is drawing on this theoretical premise.
- Problems: Other psychological states can cause the same non-behavioural responses (i.e., anxiety).
Reality monitoring
- Looks at real and imagined memories
- If memories are based on real experiences they will contain more “contextual, sensory, and semantic information; conversely, untruthful accounts are similar to imagined experiences, being marked more strongly by inner cognitive states.”
- So- lies have less external detail and more internal detail.
Beliefs
- beliefs guide behaviour
- Two different methods are used to identify peoples beliefs about the cues that indicate if someone is being deceptive.
- Surveys.
- Controlled laboratory-based studies.
Surveys findings identification of deceptive indicators
- Both believe that eye contact reduces when someone is lying.
- Both believe that increased bodily movements are a strong indicator of deception.
- Both groups also believe that truthful accounts are more detailed.
Mann, Vrjj and Bull (2004)
- policers shown segments of live police interviews with suspects.
- They were then asked to:
- Identify the liars
- Identify the cues they used
- Findings showed :
- Most common cues reported was the gaze.
- Second most common cue reported was movements.
- Therefore, police officers were more likely to identify non-verbal as opposed to verbal cues as being indicators of deception.
Hartwig, Granhag, Stromwall and Vrjj (2004).
- Had experienced police officers observe tapes of students lying or telling the truth.
- They relied on verbal and non-verbal cues.
- Verbal cues were details and plausibility.
- Non-verbal cues were gaze and movements.
- So- these findings are inconsistent with those of Mann et al.
- This is a common feature in the literature- inconsistent findings.
research conclusion in detecting deception
- The collective body of research indicates that experts and lay people use very similar cues when determining if someone is lying or not.
- These cues are often poor indicators of deception.
feedback hypothesis
is that one’s facial expression directly affects their emotional experience.
Vrij and Semin (1996)-
prisoners better understood the relationship between non-verbal behaviour and deception than customs officers, detectives, police officers and prison officers.
Granhag, Andersson, Stromwall and Hartwig (2004)
criminals beliefs about verbal and non-verbal cues to deception were less stereotypical than those held by prison officers and students.
police training
- Within an international context, during police training, officers are often instructed to examine non-verbal behaviour.
- Training could increase the chance of making an error in judgement.
- Research supports this view.
Indau, Reid and Buckley
indicate that posture shifts, grooming gestures, and placing a hand over the mouth are reliable indicators of deception.
Kassin and Fong (1999)
compared the ability of police officers trained in the Reid technique and a group not, to detect deception – the untrained group outperformed the trained.
Vrj has recently called for researchers to look at individual
- So- do people behave differently when lying and why?
- Is it an emotional response that causes a change in behaviour
- e.g lying makes you feel uncomfortable?
- Or is it a cognitive response
- e.g. increased cognitive load causes a change in behaviour?
Lie Detection Methods
- Analysing speech
- Measuring physiological responses
- Observing behaviour
Statement Validity Analysis (SVA)
- Semi-Structured Interview is conducted.
- Stage 2 is a Criteria Based Content Analysis.
- Stage 3 is Validity analysis.
criteria-based content analysis (CBCA)
a forensic tool that aims at distinguishing true from false statements made by crime victims. As such, CBCA and similar techniques are regularly employed by psychological expert-witnesses in court.
Lab and field studies to see if the CBCA works
- In lab studies, statements of people who lied or not, for the purpose of experimentation are assessed.
- Poses a problem in terms of validity
- real statements are recounts of highly emotional events.
- In lab studies
- those types of experiences can never be simulated.
- Infield studies real sexual abuse cases are examined.
- These are obviously more realistic – but it is impossible to know with certainty if the account being examined is in fact true or not.
- For this reason, they tend to focus on cases where the perpetrator confesses
- however, not all confessions are in fact true confessions (false confessions)
- Given these difficulties, there are no data from field studies indicating the reliability of CBCA as a lie detection method.***
- Lab studies have shown a 73% accuracy rate for detecting truthfulness and 72% for detecting lies.
Physiological Analysis
- polygraphy