Behavioral and Physiological Measures in the Detection of Concealed Information.

Gronau, Nurit; Ben‐Shakhar, Gershon; Cohen, Asher

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.147

Cited by 78 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, it has been argued that RTs have many advantages over autonomic and neural measures, as they are cheap, easy, and quick to measure (Verschuere & De Houwer, 2011). On the other hand, critics have stated that RTs are under voluntary control and are thus not suited in deception contexts (e.g., Farwell & Donchin, 1991;Gronau, Ben-Shakhar, & Cohen, 2005;Mertens & Allen, 2008;Sip et al, 2013).…”

Section: Measuring Deception With Reaction Timesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lying takes time: A meta-analysis on reaction time measures of deception.

Suchotzki¹,

Verschuere²,

Bockstaele³

et al. 2017

Psychological Bulletin

Self Cite

208

210

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lie detection techniques are frequently used, but most of them have been criticized for the lack of empirical support for their predictive validity and presumed underlying mechanisms. This situation has led to increased efforts to unravel the cognitive mechanisms underlying deception and to develop a comprehensive theory of deception. A cognitive approach to deception has reinvigorated interest in reaction time (RT) measures to differentiate lies from truths and to investigate whether lying is more cognitively demanding than truth telling. Here, we provide the results of a meta-analysis of 114 studies (n = 3307) using computerized RT paradigms to assess the cognitive cost of lying. Results revealed a large standardized RT difference, even after correction for publication bias (d = 1.049; 95% CI [0.930; 1.169]), with a large heterogeneity amongst effect sizes. Moderator analyses revealed that the RT deception effect was smaller, yet still large, in studies in which participants received instructions to avoid detection. The autobiographical Implicit Association Test produced smaller effects than the Concealed Information Test, the Sheffield Lie Test, and the Differentiation of Deception paradigm. An additional meta-analysis (17 studies, n = 348) showed that, like other deception measures, RT deception measures are susceptible to countermeasures. Whereas our meta-analysis corroborates current cognitive approaches to deception, the observed heterogeneity calls for further research on the boundary conditions of the cognitive cost of deception. RT-based measures of deception may have potential in applied settings, but countermeasures remain an important challenge. LYING TAKES TIME 3

show abstract

Section: Measuring Deception With Reaction Timesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lying takes time: A meta-analysis on reaction time measures of deception.

Suchotzki¹,

Verschuere²,

Bockstaele³

et al. 2017

Psychological Bulletin

Self Cite

208

210

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The receiveroperating characteristic (ROC) allows to estimate the capability of differentiating guilty from innocent participants for all possible cut-off points and for different dependent measures and their combination. The area under the ROC curve varies between 0 and 1 with a chance level of 0.5 and serves as an overall index of detection accuracy (Bamber, 1975;Ben-Shakhar and Elaad, 2003;Gronau et al, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, according to www.frontiersin.org Ben-Shakhar (1985), Gamer et al (2006), and Gronau et al (2005), the physiological measures are z-transformed for each subject and for each data channel. All probe and irrelevant trials (but not neutral trials and the first trials of each stimulus category) were used to calculate individual means and standard deviations.…”

Section: Data Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face and voice as social stimuli enhance differential physiological responding in a Concealed Information Test

Ambach

2012

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attentional, intentional, and motivational factors are known to influence the physiological responses in a Concealed Information Test (CIT). Although concealing information is essentially a social action closely related to motivation, CIT studies typically rely on testing participants in an environment lacking of social stimuli: subjects interact with a computer while sitting alone in an experimental room.To address this gap, we examined the influence of social stimuli on the physiological responses in a CIT. Seventy-one participants underwent a mock-crime experiment with a modified CIT. In a between-subjects design, subjects were either questioned acoustically by a pre-recorded male voice presented together with a virtual male experimenter's uniform face or by a text field on the screen, which displayed the question devoid of face and voice. Electrodermal activity (EDA), respiration line length (RLL), phasic heart rate (pHR), and finger pulse waveform length (FPWL) were registered. The Psychopathic Personality Inventory -Revised (PPI-R) was administered in addition.The differential responses of RLL, pHR, and FPWL to probe vs. irrelevant items were greater in the condition with social stimuli than in the text condition; interestingly, the differential responses of EDA did not differ between conditions. No modulatory influence of the PPI-R sum or subscale scores was found. The results emphasize the relevance of social aspects in the process of concealing information and in its detection. Attentional demands as well as the participants' motivation to avoid detection might be the important links between social stimuli and physiological responses in the CIT.

show abstract

“…It should be noted that although the CQT is the most widely used test in North America, its scientifi c validity has been criticized (Gronau et al, 2005;. In contrast, the GKT/ CIT, widely used only in Japan, has been supported as an objective test (Gronau et al, 2005;.…”

Section: Polygraphmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The polygraph is typically used in conjunction with one or more of a set of related tests: the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT), also known as the Concealed Information Test (CIT) (Ben-Shakhar and Elaad, 2002); the Comparison Question Test or Control Question Test (CQT) (Raskin and Honts, 2002); or the Relevant/ Irrelevant Test (RIT) (Iacono, 2000). It should be noted that although the CQT is the most widely used test in North America, its scientifi c validity has been criticized (Gronau et al, 2005;. In contrast, the GKT/ CIT, widely used only in Japan, has been supported as an objective test (Gronau et al, 2005;.…”

Section: Polygraphmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educing Information: Interrogation: Science and Art Foundations for the Future

2006

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. REPORT DATE DEC 20062 Same as Report (SAR)18 About the Intelligence Science Board MissionThe Intelligence Science Board was chartered in August 2002 and advises the Offi ce of the Director of National Intelligence and senior Intelligence Community leaders on emerging scientifi c and technical issues of special importance to the Intelligence Community. The mission of the Board is to provide the Intelligence Community with outside expert advice and unconventional thinking, early notice of advances in science and technology, insight into new applications of existing technology, and special studies that require skills or organizational approaches not resident within the Intelligence Community. The Board also creates linkages between the Intelligence Community and the scientifi c and technical communities. ImpactBoard members initiate studies and assessments in topic areas where they believe that the Board's interdisciplinary expertise and experience could benefi t the Intelligence Community. In addition, the Board responds to tasking from the Associate Director of National Intelligence for Science and Technology and from the heads of elements of the Intelligence Community. All ISB tasks are mutually agreed to by the ISB and by the Associate Director of National Intelligence for Science and Technology. The Board's procedures for developing and communicating its fi ndings and advice will remain as fl exible and informal as is possible, consistent with the mission. MembershipThe Board is composed of approximately 25 members whose range of expertise encompasses the physical and biological sciences, information technology and communications, information policy, and the law, among others. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors and do not refl ect the offi cial policy or position of the Department of Defense, the National Foreign Intelligence Community or the U.S. Government EDUCING INFORMATION Interrogation: Science and Art The National Defense Intelligence College supports and encourages research on intelligence issues that distills lessons and improves Intelligence Community capabilities for policy-level and operational consumersEducing Information: Interrogatio...

show abstract

Behavioral and Physiological Measures in the Detection of Concealed Information.

Cited by 78 publications

References 60 publications

Lying takes time: A meta-analysis on reaction time measures of deception.

Lying takes time: A meta-analysis on reaction time measures of deception.

Face and voice as social stimuli enhance differential physiological responding in a Concealed Information Test

Educing Information: Interrogation: Science and Art Foundations for the Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About