In this article we introduce a novel interviewing tactic to elicit admissions from guilty suspects. By influencing the suspects' perception of the amount of evidence the interviewer holds against them, we aimed to shift the suspects' counterinterrogation strategies from less to more forthcoming. The proposed tactic (SUE-Confrontation) is a development of the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) framework and aims to affect the suspects' perception by confronting them with statement-evidence inconsistencies. Participants (N = 90) were asked to perform several mock criminal tasks before being interviewed using 1 of 3 interview techniques: (a) SUE-Confrontation, (b) Early Disclosure of Evidence, or (c) No Disclosure of Evidence. As predicted, the SUE-Confrontation interview generated more statement-evidence inconsistencies from suspects than the Early Disclosure interview. Importantly, suspects in the SUE-Confrontation condition (vs. Early and No disclosure conditions) admitted more self-incriminating information and also perceived the interviewer to have had more information about the critical phase of the crime (the phase where the interviewer lacked evidence). The findings show the adaptability of the SUE-technique and how it may be used as a tool for eliciting admissions.
In the current climate of migration and globalization, personality characteristics of individuals from different countries have received a growing interest. Previous research has established reliable differences in personality traits across countries. The present study extends this research by examining 30 personality traits in 22 countries, based on an online survey in English with large national samples (NTotal = 130,602). The instrument used was a comprehensive, open-source measure of the Five Factor Model (FFM) (IPIP-NEO-120). We postulated that differences in personality traits between countries would be small, labeling this a Similarities Hypothesis. We found support for this in three stages. First, similarities across countries were observed for model fits for each of the five personality trait structures. Second, within-country sex differences for the five personality traits showed similar patterns across countries. Finally, the overall the contribution to personality traits from countries was less than 2%. In other words, the relationship between a country and an individual’s personality traits, however interesting, are small. We conclude that the most parsimonious explanation for the current and past findings is a cross-country personality Similarities Hypothesis.
The study adds to the growing body of research on true and false intentions, traditionally a neglected area of deception research. Specifically, the goal was to examine the claim that statements of true intent would be colored by markers of good planning behavior to a greater extent than statements of false intent. Participants (N = 132) were divided into truth tellers and liars. Truth tellers were given a neutral task to plan and carry out. Liars were given a mock crime to plan and carry out and were also told to plan a cover story to be used in case they were apprehended. The cover story (i.e., liars' false intention) was to be thematically similar to the truth tellers' task. Following the planning phase, but before the task commenced, participants were interviewed about their intent. Transcribed interviews were coded for markers of good planning behavior (e.g., effective time allocation, implementation intention related utterances, and likelihood to speak of potential problems). As predicted, truth tellers' statements were colored to a higher degree than those of liars by such markers. The results earmark this approach as a viable direction for future research.
Drawing-based deception detection techniques 2 AbstractThe current article presents a concise overview of the emerging literature on drawingbased deception detection techniques. We cover the theoretical rationale of such techniques as well as the main results from the extant empirical studies. These studies have primarily looked at differences in the drawings between truth tellers and liars in terms of quality (e.g., detail, plausibility) and consistency (both within-group, and between-statement). The findings highlight drawings as a promising tool to elicit differences between truth tellers and liars on such cues. The paper also examines more practical aspects, such as practitioners' experience of the approach and preference for the approach in training studies. Finally, the susceptibility of the approach to counter-measures and directions for future research are discussed. Although research on drawingbased deception detection techniques is still very much in its infancy, results of this first round of studies are promising. They indicate the potential of incorporating drawings into real-life investigative interviews as a cheap, effective, and easy to use approach to deception detection.
Summary The current meta‐analysis examines the cognitive approach to lie detection. Our goal was to assess the practical utility of this approach by examining whether it improves the lie detection ability of human observers. The cognitive approach to lie detection led to an average accuracy rate of 60.00%, 95% CI [56.42; 63.53] and a bias corrected average accuracy rate of 55.03%, 95% CI [48.83; 61.16]. Critically, this result is moderated by whether observers were informed, or not, about which cues to focus on. Naïve observers had average accuracy rates of 52.37%, 95% CI [48.80%; 55.93%], little better than chance. In contrast, informed observers had average accuracy rates of 75.81%, 95% CI [71.52%; 79.86%]. This promising result is qualified by indications of publication bias, considerable heterogeneity between studies, and a lack of research on important practical issues, such as the influence of counter‐measures. Although these shortcomings raise a note of caution, we remain optimistic about future research on the topic.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.