Vrijj And Mann: Detecting Lies (Suspects) Flashcards
PPs?
Volunteer same
- EXP1: 1 convicted criminal
- EXP2: 59 male, 6 female police officers West Sussex
Method EXP1?
Coding study (prep)
Method EXP2?
Lab exp using independent measures
Procedure EXP1?
•suspect (later convicted of murder) videotapes during several hours of interview
-police had 2 eyewitness testimonies
-2 experienced officers present+his lawyer
-suspect denied involvement but later proved guilty
•6 fragments isolated+codes for 12 behaviours
(E.g gaze aversion, smiling, speech rate)
Results EXP1?
- during pre-confession interviews: longer pauses, spoke slower, more speech disturbances than when telling truth
- in confession interview, showed similar patterns of behaviour
- appears when lying he had to think harder, telling truth he had to control behaviour
Procedure EXP2?
•selected videotape fragments shown to 65 police officers who were asked after each:
- Is he lying? (Yes or no)
- Is he tense? (Likert scale 1-7)
- Is he controlling his behaviour? (1-7)
- Is he having to think hard? (1-7)
What were the 2 IVs in EXP2?
- whether murderer lying or not in tape
* whether clips taken before or after confession
Results EXP2?
- accuracy 64% (above level of chance+most deception studies)
- better at detecting truth (70%) than lies (57%)
- high individual differences (some based on stereotypes, some more perceptive)
Conclusions?
- murderer contradicted stereotypical lying behaviours e.g nervousness
- murderer had been previously interviewed so possible d.c
Strengths?
- lab exp= high control, standardised, cause+effect
- quantitative data
- high Eco validity
Weaknesses?
- low Eco v as lab
- ethnocentric
- androcentrically biased
- small sample
- reductionist= irl have background info
Aim?
To investigate the behaviour of a suspect telling lies during police interviews+to assess the accuracy of with which the police identify lies.