Applying the verifiability approach to deception detection in alibi witness situations

Discriminating deceptive from truthful statements using the verifiability approach: A meta‐analysis

“…As a second moderator, we included “scenario.” The first study (G. Nahari, Vrij, & Fisher, 2014a) used alibi statements and found large effects for verifiable details and the verifiable non‐verifiable ratio. In subsequent studies, the alibi scenario also yielded positive results (A. C. Harvey, Vrih, Sarikas, et al, 2018; G. Nahari & Vrij, 2014; G. Nahari, Vrij, & Fisher, 2014b; Vernham et al, 2020). Nahari (G. Nahari, 2018; G. Nahari, Leal, et al, 2014) argued that the alibi scenario is ideally suited for VA because an interviewee's statement is limited to the specific time and location the crime was committed.…”

“…In subsequent studies, the alibi scenario also yielded positive results (A. C. Harvey, Vrih, Sarikas, et al, 2018;G. Nahari, Vrij, & Fisher, 2014b;Vernham et al, 2020). Nahari (G. Nahari, 2018;G.…”

“…When papers reported on several between subject conditions, they were included as separate studies when the condition was hypothesized to affect the variables of interest (e.g., with or without IP; open or closed questioning procedure; with or without model statement), otherwise they were merged (e.g., across different types of deception; I. Boskovic, Dibbets, et al, 2019; I. Boskovic, Gallardo, et al, 2019). For the study that interviewed pairs of participants collectively versus individually (Vernham et al, 2020), we only included the individually delivered statement. For Verigin et al (2020) we included only the condition in which participants reported their actions over the 2‐h window.…”

“…In their most recent reviews, the original authors argue that predictions about unverifiable details may not be that straightforward and may depend on level of motivation, with only motivated liars expected to provide unverifiable details in their account (A. Vrij & Nahari, 2019). Despite these recent insights, many researchers have derived the prediction from VA that liars will include more unverifiable details than truth tellers (Bogaard et al, 2020; A. C. Harvey, Vrij, Leal, et al, 2017; A. C. Harvey, Vrij, Nahari, & Ludwig, 2017; I. Boskovic, Bogaard, et al, 2017; Körner and Urban, 2018; G. Nahari, Vrij, & Fisher, 2014a; Vernham et al, 2020; Verschuere et al, 2020). Third, a ratio score is expected to capture both effects, and truth tellers are predicted to provide statements that hold a larger number of verifiable details (relative to total number of details) compared to liars.…”

“…Boskovic, Bogaard, et al, 2017;Körner and Urban, 2018;G. Nahari, Vrij, & Fisher, 2014a;Vernham et al, 2020;Verschuere et al, 2020). Third, a ratio score is expected to capture both effects, and truth tellers are predicted to provide statements that hold a larger number of verifiable details (relative to total number of details) compared to liars.…”