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
polygraph measures:
- Blood pressure.
- Heart rate.
- Breathing rate.
- Galvanic skin response (the resistance of the skin to an electrical current – sweating).
types of polygraphs
- Comparison Question Test (CQT)
- Guilt Knowledge Test (GKT).
Comparison Question Test (CQT)
- The comparison question test compares responses to relevant questions with responses to control questions.
- Relevant questions are those that are associated with the crime
- Control questions deal with acts that are not specifically related to the crime.
- relevant questions should produce higher arousal if the suspect is lying
Guilt Knowledge Test (GKT)
- The Guilt Knowledge determines if a suspect has knowledge about an aspect of a crime that he/she does not want to disclose.
- For example :
- Crime involves a knife
- Show a series of knives
- Show the actual weapon
Reliability of polygraph
- No conclusive evidence to suggest that polygraph tests are reliable indicators of truthfulness or not.
- Research shows that between 53% and 78% of innocent suspects are incorrectly classified as guilty.
- Arousal might occur with the innocent for a number of reasons :
- Relevant questions are arousal provoking anyway.
- Arousal may increase because innocent people fear that their answers would be interpreted as lying on the polygraph.
- On this basis – tests are not admissible in court. But still are used by police as an investigative technique.
Behavioural Analysis
Involves analysing non-verbal behaviour.
Objective indicators of deception
- There is no single behavioural, verbal or physiological response that is uniquely related to deception.
- Very few cues are related to deception.
- For non-verbal cues:
- Liars tend to speak with a higher-pitched voice.
- For verbal cues:
- Liars stories sound less plausible.
- Stories include less detail (visual, auditory, spatial)
- make fewer illustrators, hand and finger movements.
Sue technique
The SUE technique has been shown to be successful in eliciting cues to deception in single suspects, small groups of suspects, children, and with suspects lying about past actions and also intentions.
Phases of SUE
- Planning of the interview.
- Informing the suspect.
- The free recall phase.
- The question phase.
- Securing the suspect’s statement.
- Matching the statement and the incriminating information.
Guilty suspects’ strategies
- A pre-interview strategy when facing a police interview.
- Avoid mentioning possibly incriminating information during an interview.
- Deny that they hold the incriminating knowledge
Innocent suspects’ strategies
- Less likely to bring a strategy to the interview room.
- Didn’t avoid potentially incriminating information – offered it - as they believed if you tell the truth – it will shine.
- Belief in a just world- good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people.
