Criteria-Based Content Analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes

Abstract

Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is a tool to assess the veracity of written statements, and is used as evidence in criminal courts in several countries in the world. CBCA scores are expected to be higher for truth tellers than for liars. The underlying assumption of CBCA is that (i) lying is cognitively more difficult than truth telling, and (ii) that liars are more concerned with the impression they make on others than truth tellers. However, these assumptions have not been tested to date. In the present experiment 80 participants (undergraduate students) lied or told the truth about an event. Afterwards, they completed a questionnaire measuring “cognitive load” and “tendency to control speech”. The interviews were transcribed and coded by trained CBCA raters. In agreement with CBCA assumptions, (i) truth tellers obtained higher scores than liars, (ii) liars experienced more cognitive load than truth tellers, and (iii) liars tried harder to control their speech. However, cognitive load and speech control were not correlated with CBCA scores in the predicted way.     

Are individuals' familiarity judgments diagnostic of prior contact?

The extensive eyewitness memory research literature has been restricted to memory for strangers. Although it is often assumed that eyewitnesses are more accurate identifying familiar than unfamiliar individuals, little is known about whether individuals' familiarity judgments are diagnostic of prior contact. Caucasian and Asian sophomores (N=139) in two small private high schools viewed yearbook pictures of (a) graduated students from their school who were seniors (fourth year) when participants were freshmen (first year) (familiar) and (b) unfamiliar individuals, and responded whether each was ‘familiar’. The design was completely crossed; familiar faces at each school served as unfamiliar faces at the other school. Based on d′ data, the cross-race effect resulted for familiarity judgments. Also, although individuals' familiarity judgments were diagnostic of prior contact, accuracy was low (mean hit rate=0.42; mean false alarm rate=0.23), rendering an eyewitness's report of having seen a perpetrator casually in the past of limited forensic value.     

Offenders’ uncoerced false confessions: A new application of statement analysis?

Purpose. Deception detection research has mainly studied denials and distortions given by students. This study examined true and false confessions as told by offenders. It was hypothesized that the statement analytic techniques Criteria‐Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and Reality Monitoring (RM) would discriminate truths and lies. Methods. Truthful and deceptive confessions to crime were given by 30 offenders (both women and men) in a within‐subject design. The participants were in prison at the time of data collection, and told the truth about a crime they had committed and been sentenced for. In addition, they made up a lie about a different crime after a few minutes of preparation. The transcribed statements were scored for CBCA and RM criteria. Results. Results showed that neither total CBCA nor total RM scores differentiated between lies and truths. Some individual CBCA criteria, however, showed differences: more self‐deprecations and doubts about own testimony in the told lies, and more unexpected complications in the truths. Conclusions. The results are discussed in relation to statement analysis of offenders’ accounts, individual CBCA criteria, as well as the development of criminal experience and familiarity with the event and setting. Implications for triers of fact and suggestions for future research are considered.     

Cues to Deception and Ability to Detect Lies as a Function of Police Interview Styles

In Experiment 1, we examined whether three interview styles used by the police, accusatory, information-gathering and behaviour analysis, reveal verbal cues to deceit, measured with the Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and Reality Monitoring (RM) methods. A total of 120 mock suspects told the truth or lied about a staged event and were interviewed by a police officer employing one of these three interview styles. The results showed that accusatory interviews, which typically result in suspects making short denials, contained the fewest verbal cues to deceit. Moreover, RM distinguished between truth tellers and liars better than CBCA. Finally, manual RM coding resulted in more verbal cues to deception than automatic coding of the RM criteria utilising the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software programme.In Experiment 2, we examined the effects of the three police interview styles on the ability to detect deception. Sixty-eight police officers watched some of the videotaped interviews of Experiment 1 and made veracity and confidence judgements. Accuracy scores did not differ between the three interview styles; however, watching accusatory interviews resulted in more false accusations (accusing truth tellers of lying) than watching information-gathering interviews. Furthermore, only in accusatory interviews, judgements of mendacity were associated with higher confidence. We discuss the possible danger of conducting accusatory interviews.     

Will the Truth Come Out? The Effect of Deception,Age, Status,Coaching, and Social Skills on CBCA Scores

The impact of Veracity, Age, Status (witness or suspect), Coaching (informed or uninformed regarding CBCA), and Social Skills (social anxiety, social adroitness, and self-monitoring) on Criteria-Based Content Analysis scores was examined. Participants (aged 5–6, 10–11, 14–15, and undergraduates) participated in a rubbing the blackboard event. In a subsequent interview they told the truth or lied about the event. They were accused of having rubbed the blackboard themselves (suspect condition) or were thought to have witnessed the event (witness condition), and were or were not taught some CBCA criteria prior to the interview. CBCA scores discriminated between liars and truth tellers in children, adults, witnesses, and suspects. However, truth tellers obtained higher CBCA scores than liars only when the liars were uninformed about CBCA. CBCA scores were correlated with social skills. It is argued that these findings should caution those who believe that the validity of CBCA has been conclusively demonstrated.     

Measuring the accuracy of facial approximations: a comparative study of resemblance rating and face array methods

The success of facial approximation is thought to depend, at least in part, upon the "accuracy" of the constructed face. However, methods of accuracy assessment are varied and this range in methods may be responsible for the disparate results reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to determine if the accuracy results of one facial approximation were comparable across two different assessment methods (resemblance ratings and simultaneous face array tests using unfamiliar assessors) and if resemblance ratings co-varied with recognition responses. True-positive recognition performance from the facial approximation was poor (21%) while resemblance scores using the same facial approximation were moderately high (3 out of 5 on a five-point scale). These results are not, therefore, consistent and indicate that either different variables are being evaluated by the methods, or the same variable is being examined but with different weight/calibration. Further resemblance ratings tests of the facial approximation to three foil faces from the face array revealed that resemblance scores were similar irrespective of which face was compared, and did not closely correspond with the degree of recognition performance. This was especially the case for isolated comparisons of single faces to the facial approximation. Collectively, these results indicate that resemblance ratings are: (i) insensitive measures of a facial approximation's accuracy; and (ii) inconsistent with results of unfamiliar simultaneous face-array recognition results. These data suggest that familiar and unfamiliar recognition tests should be given increased weight in contrast to current resemblance rating tests.     

Children recalling an event repeatedly: Effects on RM and CBCA scores

Purpose. The fact that abused children often talk about their experiences before entering the legal system is a neglected factor in terms of the validation of different reliability assessment techniques. Hence, the present study investigated the extent to which the scores of the reality monitoring technique (RM) and the criteria‐based content analysis technique (CBCA) were affected by the number of times children recalled an experienced or an imagined event. Method. Children (aged 12–13 years, N – 80) participated in an experiment where half the sample experienced a real event (an interaction with a stranger outside his car) and then recalled it either one or four times (over a period of 14 days), and the other half imagined the same event and thereafter recalled it either one or four times. The statements given at the final (or only) recall session were analysed with both CBCA and RM. Results. The results revealed that, on a multivariate level, both the CBCA and RM sets of criteria discriminated between truthful and fabricated statements. The total RM score (but not the total CBCA score) discriminated reliably between truthful and fabricated statements. Furthermore, RM (but not CBCA) were sensitive to the number of times the experienced or imagined event was recalled: increased presence of criteria after repeated recall. Conclusions. The results were rather promising for the RM and less so for the CBCA. Furthermore, we found that the number of recalls moderated the effectiveness of the techniques. Hence, when assessing the reliability of a child's memory, it is crucial to learn about the history of the first documented statement.     

Detecting truth in suspect interviews: the effect of use of evidence (early and gradual) and time delay on Criteria-Based Content Analysis,Reality Monitoring and inconsistency within suspect statements

The strategic use of evidence in interviews with suspects has been shown to increase the ability of interviewers to accurately and consistently distinguish truthful from deceptive accounts. The present study considers the effect of early and gradual revelation of evidence by the interviewer, and the effect of shorter and longer delay on the verbal quality of truth-teller and liar statements within a mock crime paradigm. It was hypothesised that gradual disclosure of evidence (1) in terms of inconsistencies (a) within statements and (b) between statements and such evidence and (2) of the criteria of Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and of Reality Monitoring (RM) would emphasise differences in the verbal quality of truth-teller and liar statements. Forty-two high school students took part in the study. The use of statement-evidence and within-statement inconsistency appears to be a robust cue to deception across interview style and delay. This indicates that gradual disclosure in interviews may increase interviewer accuracy in veracity decisions by eliciting statement inconsistencies. However, gradual revelation and delay affected the ability of CBCA and RM criteria to distinguish the veracity of suspect statements.     

The Dangers of Co-witness Familiarity: Investigating the Effects of Co-witness Relationships on Blame Conformity

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of pre-existing relationships between co-witnesses on statement similarity, after a post-event discussion. Although research studies have attempted to observe the effect of a pre-existing relationship on eyewitness pairs, few have investigated these effects on larger groups of co-witnesses. Four hundred and twenty participants took part in an eyewitness simulation experiment. Participants were placed into groups of five, and viewed video footage of a bar fight. After witnessing the event, participants discussed the event with group members before giving individual statements privately. The study employed a one-way between subjects design with three conditions: (1) participants discussed the event with familiar co-witnesses, (2) participants discussed the event with unfamiliar co-witnesses and (3) participants were not permitted to discuss the event with their co-witnesses (control). It was found that post-event discussion between co-witnesses increased the level of similarity in blame attribution within the eyewitness groups; however, this difference was only significant in groups where eyewitnesses shared a pre-existing relationship. In addition, the level of uncertainty was reduced when eyewitnesses took part in post-event discussions. It is suggested that this might be attributed to an increased level of informational influence between familiar co-witnesses. However, there was no evidence suggesting that post-event discussions led to an increase in false eyewitness statements.     

Assessment of child witness statements using criteria-based content analysis (CBCA): The effects of age,verbal ability,and interviewer's emotional style

Abstract

The goal of the study was to determine what effects age, verbal ability (assessed with WISC-R Vocabulary), and interviewer's emotional style would have on the occurrence of Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) criteria. Children (N = 68) from three different age-groups (7–8, 10–11, and 13–14 years) made both a true and a false statement concerning a mildly traumatic event. The correct classification rate was 66%. Age and verbal ability were found to increase the occurrence of some of the CBCA criteria irrespective of the truthfulness of the statements. Also, different criteria differentiated between true and false statements in different age groups. Interviewer behaviour also affected the occurrence of the criteria. It is concluded that the CBCA should not be used in court proceedings in its present form.     

You cannot hide your telephone lies: Providing a model statement as an aid to detect deception in insurance telephone calls

Deception research regarding insurance claims is rare but relevant given the financial loss in terms of fraud. In Study 1, a field study in a large multinational insurance fraud detection company, truth telling mock claimants (N = 19) and lying mock claimants (N = 21) were interviewed by insurance company telephone operators. These operators classified correctly only 50% of these truthful and lying claimants, but their task was particularly challenging: Claimants said little, and truthful and deceptive statements did not differ in quality (measured with Criteria‐Based Content Analysis [CBCA]) or plausibility. In Study 2, a laboratory experiment, participants in the experimental condition (N = 43) were exposed to an audiotaped truthful and detailed account of an event that was unrelated to insurance claims (a day at the motor races). The number of words, quality of the statement (measured with CBCA), and plausibility of the participants' accounts were compared with participants who were not given a model statement (N = 40). The participants who had listened to the model statement provided longer statements than control participants, truth tellers obtained higher CBCA scores than liars, and only in the model statement condition did truth tellers sound more plausible than liars. Providing participants with a model statement is thus an innovative and successful tool to elicit cues to deception. Providing such a model has the potential to enhance performance in insurance call interviews, and, as we argue, in many other interview settings.     

Can Criteria-Based Content Analysis Distinguish Between True and False Statements of African-American Speakers?

The Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) technique is the core component of the Statement Validity Assessment (SVA), an interviewing process that attempts to judge allegations of child sexual abuse for truthfulness. As the nucleus of the SVA, the CBCA has been promoted as a way to detect truth by analyzing the verbal content of such an allegation. However, all conclusions of the CBCA's usefulness as an indicator of truth have been based on European and/or White perspectives, and this is the first study to address the implications of probable differences of verbal content meaning across ethnic groups. The results failed to support the hypotheses that Black speakers' truthful statements contained fewer criteria than Whites' statements, or that CBCA training would only enhance truth detection of White speakers. First, in contrast to earlier work, the present study found that, despite the fact that true and false statements contained criteria to differing degrees, the total number of CBCA criteria in an adult's statement was uncorrelated with truthfulness for statements made by Blacks or by Whites. A discriminant analysis showed that CBCA verbal content criteria did, in fact, have different significance for Whites than for Blacks. Certain CBCA criteria were stronger predictors of truth for one ethnic group than for the other. It is suggested that more research is needed before the CBCA is relied upon in criminal investigations.     

Violence ratings of female patients in broadmoor hospital

Abstract

A study is described which characterised the female population of Broadmoor Special Hospital on a scale (Robertson et al., 1987) which rates violence associated with the index offence and previous episodes of violence both in terms of prosecuted violence and unprosecuted incidents. This scale has been applied recently to the male population of Broadmoor (Wong et al., 1993). The findings here confirm the notion that the female population of a Special Hospital are less violent than the males in terms of rating of violence associated with the index offence and in previous convictions for violent offending. The females contain a larger proportion of patients convicted of the offence of Arson (index offence) and patients transferred from other hospitals because of being unmanageable in these settings (under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act). Extreme ratings of violence amongst the females is associated with a diagnosis of personality disorder rather than schizophrenia or psychosis.     

General job stress and job-specific stress in juvenile correctional officers

Measures of general job stress (Job Stress Index—JSI; Sandman, 1992) and appraisal of specific job-related stressors (SSOSQ; Anson et al., 1997) were administered to 413 juvenile correctional officers (JCOs) and to eighty-four of their supervisors. JCOs evaluated their work environment as more stressful on the JSI than workers in the normative sample on every job stress dimension except ‘time pressure’. The highest stress intensity score was in the area of ‘competence of others’, however, the highest score relative to workers in other vocations was for ‘physical demands and danger’. JCOs who had been employed longer and had higher educational attainment had higher JSI scores; no JSI differences were found as a function of JCO race or gender. Supervisor rankings of sources of stress for themselves were virtually identical to those of JCOs, although overall stress intensity ratings were significantly lower for supervisors. On the more job-specific SSOSQ, lack of support by agency, long hours, and inadequate tools for the job eclipsed physical danger as stressors. On this measure, non-Caucasians and those with longer tenure on the job had higher stress scores, particularly in the area of physical danger; females versus males reported higher stress stemming from lack of support by agency and everyday job duties. Supervisors rated JCOs' work environment as more stressful than JCOs did themselves, but rankings of stressors by JCOs, supervisors, and by adult officers in Anson et al.'s sample were not significantly different, indicating generalizability to a wide range of correctional settings. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for development of stress management interventions oriented around increasing officers' autonomy and sense of control.