The Impact of Beliefs Concerning Deception on Perceptions of Nonverbal Behavior: Implications for Neuro-Linguistic Programming-Based Lie Detection

Regularly employed in a forensic context, the Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) model purports that the behavioral distinction between somebody who is remembering information and somebody who is constructing information lies in the direction of their eye movements. This strategy reflects numerous current approaches to lie detection, which presume that nonverbal behavior influences perceptions and judgments about deception. The present study emphasized a reverse order by investigating whether beliefs that an individual is deceptive influence perceptions of the respective individual’s nonverbal behavior as indicated by observed eye movement patterns. Sixty participants were randomly assigned to either a group informed that right eye movements indicate constructed and thus deceptive information or a group informed that left eye movements indicate constructed and thus deceptive information. Each participant viewed six investigative interviews depicting the eye movement patterns of mock suspects labeled as deceptive or truthful. The interviews were structured according to different right/left eye movement ratios. Results revealed that participants reportedly observed the deceptive suspects displaying significantly more eye movements in the direction allegedly indicative of deception than did the truthful suspects. This result occurred despite the fact that the actual eye movement ratios in both deceptive/truthful sets of interviews were identical and the eye movements were predominantly in the opposite direction of that allegedly indicative of deception. The results are discussed in the context of encoding-based cognitive-processing theories. Limitations on the generality of the results are emphasized and the applicability (or lack thereof) of NLP-based lie detection in forensic contexts is discussed.     

In Search of Indicators of Detective Aptitude: Police Recruits’ Logical Reasoning and Ability to Generate Investigative Hypotheses

Previous psychological research on criminal investigation has not systematically addressed the role of deductive and inductive reasoning skills in decision-making in detectives. This study examined the relationship between these skills derived from a cognitive ability test used for police recruitment and test scores from an investigative reasoning skills task (Fahsing and Ask 2016). Newly recruited students at the Norwegian Police University College (N = 166) were presented with two semi-fictitious missing-person cases and were asked to report all relevant hypotheses and necessary investigative actions in each case. The quality of participants’ responses was gauged by comparison with a gold standard established by a panel of senior police experts. The scores from the deductive and inductive reasoning test were not related to participants’ performance on the investigative reasoning task. However, the presence or absence of an investigative “tipping-point” (i.e. arrest decision) in the two cases was systematically associated with participants’ ability to generate investigative hypotheses. Methodological limitations and implications for police recruitment and criminal investigative practice are discussed.     

Exploring the Disclosure of Forensic Evidence in Police Interviews with Suspects

Despite many years of empirical research focusing on investigative interviewing and detecting deception, very little research attention has been paid to the various types of evidence which feature in police interviews with suspects. In particular, the use of forensic evidence in the context of police interviews has not been previously considered, although in recent years the availability of various types of forensic analyses has dramatically increased. In the current study 398 experienced police interviewers from various countries completed a questionnaire about their experience of using various types of forensic evidence in interviews with suspects, as well as their perceptions regarding the strength of various sources of forensic information and how this may affect their interviewing strategy. The results indicated that although the participants have forensic evidence available in a large proportion of their interviews with suspects, the vast majority of police interviewers have received no training about how to interpret or use such forensic information. However, the perceived strength of forensic evidence was reported by some participants to affect their interview strategy and specifically the timing of the disclosure of such evidence during an interview. These findings are discussed with reference to police training and interview techniques, and suggestions for further research are offered.     

Trauma-exposed young victims: possibilities and constraints for providing trauma support within the investigative interview

For police, the aim of an investigative interview is to obtain a detailed and reliable account from the interviewee while remaining objective and impartial. This study explores the challenges involved in interviewing traumatised young victims and providing trauma support within the legal framework. The study is based on 19 videotaped investigative interviews of highly traumatised young victims of the 2011 Utøya terror attack in Norway and research interviews with the 17 detectives who conducted the police interviews. We analysed the research interviews that comprise the main data using qualitative inductive methods. We used the videotaped investigative interviews as a framework for the research interviews. We identified various types of constraint and support that the detectives perceived and found that objectivity is critical to the interviewers’ understanding of their professional role, which results in phase-bound support. At the beginning and end of the interview, they perceive opportunities to be supportive that are in accordance with recommended trauma care. However, the interviewing detectives become more passive when the conversation is about the criminal offence and seem less confident about being supportive. This study provides relevant new insights into how police experience interviewing traumatised young victims.     

Interviewing to Elicit Cues to Deception: Improving Strategic Use of Evidence with General-To-Specific Framing of Evidence

Previous research has demonstrated that the strategic use of evidence (SUE) approach of interviewing criminal suspects is effective at eliciting cues to deception. This study aims at expanding on the SUE approach by testing the technique of general-to-specific evidence framing. We conducted an experiment using a mock terrorism paradigm. Guilty participants took part in a simulated act of terrorism, while innocent participants performed a similar act involving no transgression. All participants (N?=?102) were then interviewed using one of four evidence disclosure styles (early disclosure, late disclosure, 2-step disclosure, or 4-step disclosure). We expected that disclosing evidence to the suspect gradually, with increasing specificity, would induce guilty suspects to alter their statements to a greater extent than innocent suspects. General-to-specific evidence framing effectively discriminated between guilty and innocent suspects, but results only partially supported the hypotheses.     

Two heads are better than one? How to effectively use two interviewers to elicit cues to deception

Background. We examined the effect of a second interviewer's demeanour on cues to deception. We predicted that a supportive demeanour would be the most beneficial for eliciting verbal cues to deceit, as it would encourage truth tellers, but not liars, to say more. In addition, we examined the extent to which interviewees deliberately made eye contact with the interviewers. Liars take their credibility less for granted than truth tellers, and therefore have a greater drive to be convincing. Liars are thus more likely to monitor the interviewer to determine if the interviewer appears to believe them. Method. Participants appeared before two interviewers: the first asked all the questions and the second remained silent. The second interviewer exhibited either a supportive, neutral, or a suspicious demeanour. Results. Truth tellers provided significantly more detail than liars, but only in the supportive second interviewer condition. The effect of a second interviewer's demeanour on detail was perhaps remarkable given that the interviewees hardly looked at the second interviewer (less than 10% of the time). Liars displayed more deliberate eye contact (with the first interviewer) than truth tellers did. Conclusions. A supportive second interviewer has a positive effect on interviewing. We discuss this finding in the wider contexts of investigative interviewing and interviewing to detect deception.     

Psychopathy and Nonverbal Indicators of Deception in Offenders

The current study examined psychopathy and nonverbal indicators of deception in an incarcerated sample. Nonverbal behaviors were coded from videotapes of 45 male offenders telling true and fabricated stories about crimes. Interpersonal features of psychopathy were associated with inflated views of lying ability, verbosity, and increases in blinking, illustrator use, and speech hesitations. While lying, the more psychopathic offenders spoke faster and demonstrated increases in blinking and head movements. Indicators of deception in offenders were somewhat different from those typically observed in non-offender populations. These findings indicate that personality factors may have an impact on nonverbal indicators of deception in criminal justice settings where the detection of deception is of utmost concern.     

Clusters of Nonverbal Behaviors Differ According to Type of Question and Veracity in Investigative Interviews in a Mock Crime Context

Evaluating truthfulness and detecting deception is a capstone skill of criminal justice professionals, and researchers have long examined nonverbal cues to aid in such determinations. This paper examines the notion that testing clusters of nonverbal behaviors is a more fruitful way of making such determinations than single, specific behaviors. Participants from four ethnic groups participated in a mock crime and either told the truth or lied in an investigative interview. Fourteen nonverbal behaviors of the interviewees were coded from the interviews; differences in the behaviors were tested according to type of question and veracity condition. Different types of questions produced different nonverbal reactions. Clusters of nonverbal behaviors differentiated truth tellers from liars, and the specific clusters were moderated by question. Accuracy rates ranged from 62.6 to 72.5% and were above deception detection accuracy rates for humans and random data. These findings have implications for practitioners as well as future research and theory.     

Accusatorial and information-gathering interview and interrogation methods: a multi-country comparison

Suspect interviewing and interrogation practices have been studied in many different countries, including those in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. These studies have produced useful and interesting findings, while also leaving an opening for future inquiry. Specifically, previous research has noted that we might expect interrogation and interviewing practices to vary among different countries or regions, due to distinct approaches to suspect questioning. However, to our knowledge, few previous studies have examined the comparative use of tactics, techniques, and procedures employed to elicit confessions and information from criminal suspects across multiple countries. In the present study, using a consistent survey, we contrasted the interviewing and interrogation practices of 185 practitioners from America, Canada, and Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. In large part, we found that American and Canadian interrogators were similar to one another, and conformed to an accusatorial approach (in both deception detection and questioning techniques). In contrast, interviewers from Europe, Australia, and New Zealand conformed more to an information-gathering approach.     

Eliciting Cues to False Intent: A New Application of Strategic Interviewing

This article examined how to elicit cues to deception when a suspect is asked both about his/her intentions and his/her corresponding past planning, and when the investigator holds evidence on the suspect’s planning activities. In a new experimental set-up accommodating the main characteristics of intent, participants (N = 120) either planned a criminal or a non-criminal act. They were intercepted before completing the planned act. Each participant was interviewed in accordance with one of three interview techniques: Early Evidence disclosure or one of two versions of the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique. All the interviews were transcribed and scored for consistency. As predicted, the liars were perceived as having a higher degree of inconsistency for two of the three relevant comparisons (Statement on Planning–Evidence on Planning; Statement on Intent–Evidence on Planning). Furthermore, using the evidence strategically resulted in differences between liars and truth tellers being magnified, as predicted. This article advances previous findings in showing that by interviewing strategically with respect to the evidence, it is possible to elicit reliable cues to deception when a suspect is asked about intentions and corresponding planning activities.     

The association between investigative interviewers' knowledge of question type and adherence to best‐practice interviewing

It is well established that not all investigative interviewers adhere to ‘best‐practice’ interview guidelines (i.e., the use of open‐ended questions) when interviewing child witnesses about abuse. However, little research has examined the sub skills associated with open question usage. In this article, we examined the association between investigative interviewers' ability to identify various types of questions and adherence to open‐ended questions in a standardized mock interview. Study 1 , incorporating 27 trainee police interviewers, revealed positive associations between open‐ended question usage and two tasks; a recognition task where trainees used a structured protocol to guide their response and a recall task where they generated examples of open‐ended questions from memory. In Study 2 , incorporating a more heterogeneous sample of 40 professionals and a different training format and range of tests, positive relationships between interviewers' identification of questions and adherence to best‐practice interviewing was consistently revealed. A measure of interviewer knowledge about what constitutes best‐practice investigative (as opposed to knowledge of question types) showed no association with interviewer performance. The implications of these findings for interviewer training programs are discussed.     

Helping to sort the liars from the truth‐tellers: The gradual revelation of information during investigative interviews

Research examining detection of verbal deception reveals that lay observers generally perform at chance. Yet, in the criminal justice system, laypersons that have not undergone specialist investigative training are frequently called upon to make veracity judgements (e.g., solicitors; magistrates; juries). We sought to improve performance by manipulating the timing of information revelation during investigative interviews. A total of 151 participants played an interactive computer game as either a truth‐teller or a deceiver, and were interviewed afterwards. Game information known to the interviewer was revealed either early, at the end of the interview, or gradually throughout. Subsequently, 30 laypersons individually viewed a random selection of interviews (five deceivers and five truth‐tellers from each condition), and made veracity and confidence judgements. Veracity judgements were most accurate in the gradual condition, p < .001, η² = .97 (above chance), and observers were more confident in those judgements, p < .001, η² = .99. Deceptive interviewees reported the gradual interviews to be the most cognitively demanding, p < .001; η² = .24. Our findings suggest that the detection of verbal deception by non‐expert observers can be enhanced by employing interview techniques that maximize deceivers' cognitive load, while allowing truth‐tellers the opportunity to respond to evidence incrementally.     

欺骗与刑事司法行为的道德界限

刑事司法活动中允许使用带有欺骗性要素的侦讯谋略 ,包括设置警察圈套、实施卧底侦查以及审讯中的欺骗。但为了维护国家形象、社会信用和司法公正 ,这种欺骗应受到法律的严格规制 ,要求对象特定、不得已而使用 ,同时要求限制方法、防止虚假以及具有正当目的。而一旦侦查、司法机关对嫌疑人做出司法承诺 ,就必须信守。司法信用原则可以作为刑事司法的一项重要原则。     

The Direction of Deception: Neuro-Linguistic Programming as a Lie Detection Tool

There is a myth in popular psychology, often echoed in police literature, but as yet untested, that specific eye movements pertain to lying and truth telling. According to this line of thought, eye movements to the sender??s right indicate lying, as the sender??s eyes are drawn to the side of his/her brain where their fabrication is being created. We have put this hypothesis, derived from ??Neuro-Linguistic Programming?? to the test in two experiments. In Experiment 1, a total of 204 participants (all air passengers) were interviewed at an international airport about their forthcoming trip. All participants answered one question truthfully and one question deceptively. Some participants answered a third question truthfully, whereas others answered the same question deceptively. No conclusive evidence was found for a relationship between specific eye movements and deception. In Experiment 2, a total of 31 participants discussed their real occupation in one interview and a pretend occupation in another interview. Only three of the 31 participants revealed the eye movement pattern predicted by NLP. Reasons for the existence of the myth that liars display specific eye movements are discussed.     

SCAN as an investigative tool

Scientific content analysis (SCAN) is a technique that claims to enable the detection of deception in written statements. The underlying assumption is that statements of self-experienced events differ in several ways – such as liveliness and concreteness – from imaginary statements. It is used in many countries as an investigative tool. Nevertheless, little research on the reliability and validity of the SCAN technique is available. In this paper, two studies are presented. The first study focuses on the accuracy of SCAN to detect deception by three groups of raters with a different level of experience. This study shows a lack of validity of SCAN. Study 2 investigated the inter-rater reliability as a possible explanation for the poor validity results, and found little agreement between raters in identifying SCAN criteria. Overall, results indicate that the psychometric qualities of SCAN as an investigative tool is insufficient for use in police practice.     

Strategic Use of Evidence During Police Interviews: When Training to Detect Deception Works

Research on deception detection in legal contexts has neglected the question of how the use of evidence can affect deception detection accuracy. In this study, police trainees (N=82) either were or were not trained in strategically using the evidence when interviewing lying or truth telling mock suspects (N=82). The trainees’ strategies as well as liars’ and truth tellers’ counter-strategies were analyzed. Trained interviewers applied different strategies than did untrained. As a consequence of this, liars interviewed by trained interviewers were more inconsistent with the evidence compared to liars interviewed by untrained interviewers. Trained interviewers created and utilized the statement-evidence consistency cue, and obtained a considerably higher deception detection accuracy rate (85.4%) than untrained interviewers (56.1%).     

To act truthfully: Nonverbal behaviour and strategies during a police interrogation

Abstract

In an experiment, nonverbal indicators of deception in police interrogations of mock crimes were examined. Both vocal and nonvocal behaviours were scored. Thirty participants were subjected to long interrogations (over 9 minutes) conducted by 30 experienced police officers, asked to interrogate as they normally do. Although the liars reported being significantly more nervous, and found the task more strenuous than the truth tellers, no differences in the nonverbal behaviours scored were found. In an analysis of the strategies employed, both truth tellers and liars were found to try to not make excess movements. The principal verbal content strategy for the liars was to keep the story simple, and for truth tellers to keep the story real. The reasons why, in this demanding situation, the truth tellers and liars could not be distinguished by their nonverbal behaviour are discussed.     

Evaluating interviews which search for the truth with suspects: but are investigators’ self-assessments of their own skills truthful ones?

Self-evaluation of one’s own performance has been found in prior research to be an enabler of professional development. The task of evaluation is also a core component of a model of the investigative interviewing of victims, witnesses and suspects, being increasingly used throughout the world. However, it remains the case that there has been little research as to how practitioners approach the task itself. The present study examined the topic through the lens of observing how effectively 30 real-life investigators in the UK undertook evaluation of their interviews, representing almost the entire investigative frontline workforce of a small law enforcement agency in this country. Using an established scale of measurement, both investigators’ and an expert’s ratings of the same sample of interviews were compared across a range of tasks and behaviours. It was found that in almost all the assessed behaviours, requiring of the investigators to provide a self-rating, their scores tended to significantly outstrip those applied to the sample by the expert. Reasons are explored for the investigators’ overstated assessments. Implications for practice are then discussed.     

Will the law come running? The potential role of "brain fingerprinting" in crime investigation and adjudication in Australia

A major feature of the Australian criminal justice system is that jurors assess witness credibility and are the ultimate finders of fact. Recognising the occasional fallibility of humans in detecting truth and deception, the jury's function may be assisted by highly regulated expert evidence about a variety of scientific techniques. A recent scientific development has been the invention of "brain fingerprinting" (BF) by Dr Larry Farwell in the United States. Brain fingerprinting measures brainwave functioning to detect awareness of crime-relevant information in order to distinguish between guilty and innocent suspects. This article considers whether BF could be used for crime investigation and adjudication in Australia. By examining the rules of expert evidence and the principles relating to "novel scientific evidence", the admissibility of BF in the various Australian jurisdictions is evaluated. The utility of BF in criminal investigations and counter-terrorism initiatives is also canvassed. The authors conclude that, at the present time, it is unlikely that expert testimony on BF will be admitted in Australian criminal trials. However, the technique potentially offers other benefits to the criminal justice system, thereby warranting its consideration as a "criminal and investigative tool of the future".     

Functional MRI Detection of Deception After Committing a Mock Sabotage Crime*

Abstract: Using Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) functional MRI (fMRI) to detect deception is feasible in simple laboratory paradigms. A mock sabotage scenario was used to test whether this technology would also be effective in a scenario closer to a real‐world situation. Healthy, nonmedicated adults were recruited from the community, screened, and randomized to either a Mock‐crime group or a No‐crime group. The Mock‐crime group damaged and stole compact discs (CDs), which contained incriminating video footage, while the No‐crime group did not perform a task. The Mock‐crime group also picked up an envelope from a researcher, while the No‐crime group did not perform this task. Both groups were instructed to report that they picked up an envelope, but did not sabotage any video evidence. Participants later went to the imaging center and were scanned while being asked questions regarding the mock crime. Participants also performed a simple laboratory based fMRI deception testing (Ring‐Watch testing). The Ring‐Watch testing consisted of “stealing” either a watch or a ring. The participants were instructed to report that they stole neither object. We correctly identified deception during the Ring‐Watch testing in 25 of 36 participants (Validated Group). In this Validated Group for whom a determination was made, computer‐based scoring correctly identified nine of nine Mock‐crime participants (100% sensitivity) and five of 15 No‐crime participants (33% specificity). BOLD fMRI presently can be used to detect deception concerning past events with high sensitivity, but low specificity.