A re‐analysis that supports our main results: A reply to Levine et al.

Levine et al. (2018) criticized our meta‐analysis, but their conclusion was the same as ours: The cognitive approach to lie detection results in a modest improvement. We address and dismiss Levine et al.'s (2018) three criticisms. Regarding the ‘confound’, in our meta‐analysis we averaged the results of two cells on statistical grounds, which does not constitute a confound in statistical terms. Regarding ‘aberrant controls’, that depends entirely on the benchmarks selected and type of statistical test and meta‐analysis used. Regarding ‘unreliable data’, the claim that there is a positive relationship between ‘unreliable’ data and total accuracy in the cognitive lie detection conditions is not even supported by their own data (p = .16). We conclude with a request to Levine et al. to focus on our shared aim: to develop interview protocols that enable lie detection.     

Detecting deception in suspects: verbal cues as a function of interview strategy

Research on deception has consistently shown that people are poor at detecting deception, partly due to lack of consistent cues to deception. This research focuses on eliciting verbal cues to deception when questioning suspects who deny crime and how such cues differ due to type of questioning. An experiment examined verbal differences between innocent and guilty mock suspects (N=96) as a function of veracity and interview style (Free recall, Probes, or Free recall plus Probes). Guilty (vs innocent) suspects omitted more crime-relevant information and their statements were more likely to contradict the evidence, showing that statement–evidence inconsistency was a cue to deception. This cue to deception was more pronounced when the interview contained probes. Lie-catchers (N=192) obtained an accuracy rate higher than chance (61.5%) for detecting deceptive denials. Implications for further research on verbal cues to deception are discussed.     

Challenging interviewees during interviews: The potential effects on lie detection

Abstract

The impact of interview styles on lie detection was examined. Thirty-six truth tellers and liars (undergraduates) were interviewed in three different ways: The interview started with an information-gathering interview style (Phase 1), which then developed into an interrogation (Phase 2), and finally transformed back into an information-gathering interview style (Phase 3). On the basis of DePaulo and Kirkendol's Motivational Impairment Effect, which suggests that when people are highly motivated to get away with their lies they actually look like they are controlling their behavior, it was hypothesized that the most prominent differences between liars and truth tellers would emerge in Phase 3. The findings supported this hypothesis, and thus suggest that specific interview styles could facilitate lie detection.     

Effectiveness of deception detection training: a meta-analysis

Abstract

A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the overall effectiveness of deception detection training and to identify conditions that may moderate training effectiveness. The analysis was based on a total of 16 studies with 30 separate hypothesis tests, representing the behavior of 2847 trainees. Results indicated that the effect of deception detection training on detection accuracy was positive, significant, and of medium magnitude. Moreover, training effectiveness was moderated by the type of training implemented, training content, trainee expertise, and the type of lie told. Discussion centers on implications for training design and implementation.     

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.     

Increasing pressure does not benefit lie detection: a reply to Ten Brinke et al. (2015)

When passively attending to suspects, observers are poor at distinguishing lies from truths. Deception research has therefore shifted to examining interview styles aimed at eliciting and enhancing deception cues. Based upon a literature review and three empirical studies, ten Brinke, L., Khambatta, P., and Carney, D. R. [2015. Physically scarce (vs. enriched) environments decrease the ability to successfully tell lies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 982–992. doi:10.1037/xge0000103] recommend increasing pressure on interviewees as it would increase lie detection accuracy. In this comment, we argue that these authors (1) misinterpret the literature when concluding that lie detection benefits from increasing pressure on interviewees, and (2) their data do not show that lie detection is more accurate when pressure is increased. In absence of such data, we recommend that increasing pressure on interviewees should be avoided: it hampers the elicitation of valuable information and can lead to false confessions.     

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.     

SELF‐CONTROL AND VICTIMIZATION: A META‐ANALYSIS

A consequential development in victimization theory and research was the idea that individuals with low self‐control self‐select into the various risky behaviors that may ultimately result in their victimization. To establish the empirical status of the self‐control–victimization link, we subjected this body of work to a meta‐analysis. Our multilevel analyses of 311 effect size estimates drawn from 66 studies (42 independent data sets) indicate that self‐control is a modest yet consistent predictor of victimization. The results also show that the effect of self‐control is significantly stronger when predicting noncontact forms of victimization (e.g., online victimization) and is significantly reduced in studies that control directly for the risky behaviors that are assumed to mediate the self‐control–victimization link. We also note that the studies assessing self‐control and victimization are not representative of victimization research as a whole, with intimate partner violence (IPV), violence against women, and child abuse being severely underrepresented. We conclude that future research should continue to examine the causal processes linking self‐control to victimization, how self‐control shapes victims’ coping responses to their experience, and whether self‐control matters in contexts where individuals may have limited autonomy over the behavioral routines that put them at risk for victimization.     

ID‐Check: Online Concealed Information Test Reveals True Identity

The Internet has already changed people's lives considerably and is likely to drastically change forensic research. We developed a web‐based test to reveal concealed autobiographical information. Initial studies identified a number of conditions that affect diagnostic efficiency. By combining these moderators, this study investigated the full potential of the online ID‐check. Participants (n = 101) tried to hide their identity and claimed a false identity in a reaction time‐based Concealed Information Test. Half of the participants were presented with personal details (e.g., first name, last name, birthday), whereas the others only saw irrelevant details. Results showed that participants′ true identity could be detected with high accuracy (AUC = 0.98; overall accuracy: 86–94%). Online memory detection can reliably and validly detect whether someone is hiding their true identity. This suggests that online memory detection might become a valuable tool for forensic applications.     

Effects of preconceptions on deception detection and new answers to why lie-catchers often fail

Abstract

This study investigated the extent to which crediting and discrediting background information, given to observers before they watched three video-taped interviews with the same witness, affected their veracity judgments. Our analyses show that the observers' distribution of truth/lie-judgments were more affected by crediting than discrediting background information. We also mapped the subjective cues given to justify the truth/lie-judgments, and found that the most frequently used cue was whether or not the three statements were consistent over time. In addition, our analysis revealed two types of inter-observer disagreements. One type referred to how different cues were perceived (e.g., forty observers perceived the three statements as being inconsistent over time while an equal number perceived the same three statements as being consistent over time). The second type referred to how different cues were used (e.g., the fact that the witness was perceived as not being confident in his testimony worked against him equally as often as it worked for him).     

NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL MEASURES OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTION AND ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR: A META‐ANALYSIS*

A meta‐analysis was performed to quantify the association between antisocial behavior (ASB) and performance on neuropsychological executive functioning (EF) measures. This meta‐analysis built on Morgan and Lilienfeld's (2000) meta‐analysis of the same topic by including recently published studies and by examining a wider range of EF measures. A total of 126 studies involving 14,786 participants were included in the analyses. Antisocial groups performed significantly worse on measures of EF compared with controls, with a grand mean effect size of d= .44. Significant variation occurred in the magnitude of effect sizes calculated across studies. The largest effect sizes were found for criminality (d= .61) and externalizing behavior disorder (d= .54) ASB groups, whereas the smallest effect sizes were found for antisocial personality disorder (d= .19) groups. Larger differences in EF performance were observed across studies involving participants from correctional settings and with comorbid attention deficit and hyperactivity problems. Overall, the results indicated that a robust association exists between ASB and poor EF that held across studies with varied methodological approaches. The methodological issues in the research literature and the implications of the meta‐analysis results are discussed, and the directions for future research are proposed.     

A non-standard method for estimating accuracy of lie detection techniques demonstrated on a self-validating set of field polygraph examinations

Abstract

A unique method for estimating field accuracy of the Comparison Question Test (CQT) – a polygraph technique – is presented, based on a combined probabilistic and algebraic model. It is built on paired examinations in criminal cases in which two opposing versions per case have been subjected to polygraph tests. The developed model is ground-truth free, thus there was no need to rely on external criteria of deception (e.g., confessions or physical evidence) in estimating the accuracy of the CQT. Results indicate an accuracy rate of 0.94 in detecting guilty examinees (Sensitivity) with a 0.06 False Negative rate and an accuracy rate of 0.835 (Specificity) with False Positive of 0.165 for the innocents. These figures excluded 20% of the cases that were ruled inconclusive. When no inconclusive calls were allowed, the accuracy rate dropped down to 0.8 with 0.2 error rates for both the guilty and the innocent examinees. The importance of this research stems from its being a field study that due to the unique methodology was not subjected to weaknesses usually found in polygraph field validity studies. This method is applicable to other techniques of deception detection and with some necessary adaptations may be also to eyewitness situations.