Detecting Deception from Emotional and Unemotional Cues

Warren, Gemma Carolyn; Schertler, Elizabeth; Bull, Peter

doi:10.1007/s10919-008-0057-7

Cited by 144 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many aspects of microexpressions need to be elucidated in the future including the lower limit, individual differences in expression and recognition of microexpressions (Bond and DePaulo, 2008;O′Sullivan et al, 2009;Wang and Fu, 2009;Warren et al, 2009), effective methods of training and the retention of training effects (Hurley, 2010;Matsumoto and Hwang, 2011), and automatic brief facial expression analysis systems (Polikovsky et al, 2010;Wu et al, 2010). As for individual differences, in groups closely related to deception detection, such as crime interrogators, national security personnel, visa interviewers, sales personnel, negotiators, and mental health professionals, the expression and recognition of microexpressions might not be the same as for other people.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And if the latter was the case, then it would be important to determine how short a duration is required to cause a difference in response. In addition, Warren et al (2009) noted that there has been no valid study of the METT. Thus, it is necessary to validate the METT paradigm and compare it with a good reliability and validity test such as BART, which can be used as a valid criterion for evaluating METT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of the duration of expressions on the recognition of microexpressions

Shen

2012

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the duration of expressions on the recognition of microexpressions, which are closely related to deception. Methods: In two experiments, participants were briefly (from 20 to 300 ms) shown one of six basic expressions and then were asked to identify the expression. Results: The results showed that the participants' performance in recognition of microexpressions increased with the duration of the expressions, reaching a turning point at 200 ms before levelling off. The results also indicated that practice could improve the participants' performance. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the proper upper limit of the duration of microexpressions might be around 1/5 of a second and confirmed that the ability to recognize microexpressions can be enhanced with practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of the duration of expressions on the recognition of microexpressions

Shen

2012

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[20] have also reported that college students achieved an accuracy of only 50%. Ekman has claimed that the existence of so-called "wizards", who have extraordinary deception detection skills, could achieve higher accuracy than ordinary people [18].…”

Section: People's Performance At Lie Detectionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Does “lie to me” lie to you? An evaluation of facial clues to high-stakes deception

Lin

Levine

2016

Computer Vision and Image Understanding

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During a forensic interview, high-stakes deception is very prevalent notwithstanding the heavy consequences that may result. Studies have shown that most untrained people cannot perform well in discerning liars and truth-tellers.Thus it has become common to adopt various technical aids to compensate for this poor judgment. Examples are polygraphs, functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and linguistic analysis. However, the deception indicators used in these cases are not reliable.In the popular TV program Lie to Me, micro-expressions have been used for detecting deceit during the investigation of some criminal cases. A microexpression is considered to be a rapid and involuntary facial expression which could reveal the concealed emotion. Additionally, some psychological studies have stated that certain facial actions are more difficult to inhibit if the associated facial expressions are genuine. Similarly, these facial expressions are equally difficult to fake. This has cast light on the possibility that deception could be detected by analyzing these facial actions. However, to the best knowledge of the author, there is no computer vision research that has attempted to discriminate high-stakes deception from truth using facial expressions. Therefore, this thesis aims to test the validity of facial clues to deception detection in high-stakes situations using computer vision approaches.We note that only a limited number of the existing databases have been collected specifically for deception detection studies and none of them were obtained from real-world situations. In this thesis we present a video database of actual highstakes situations, which we have created using YouTube.We have adopted 2D appearance-based methods as the methodology to characterize the 3D facial features. Instead of building a 3D head model as is the current trend, we have extracted invariant 2D features that are related to the 3D characteristic.iii In order to discern deception and honesty, we have identified the following deceptive cues from nine separate facial regions through dynamic facial analysis: eye blink, eyebrow motion, wrinkle occurrence and mouth motion. Then these cues were integrated to form a facial behavior pattern vector. A Random Forest was trained using the collected database and applied to classify the facial patterns into deceptive and truthful categories.Despite the many uncontrolled factors (illumination, head pose and facial occlusion) in the videos in our database, we have achieved an accuracy of 76.92% when discriminating liars from truth-tellers using both micro-expressions and

show abstract

“…For instance, there is a positive correlation between the amount of attention paid by investigators to suspects' displays of emotion and their accuracy in detecting lies . Further, deception detection is more accurate when an emotional response is exhibited by the deceiver than when no emotion is shown (Warren, Schertler, & Bull, 2009). However, theories based on emotional suppression have fallen out of favour in recent years, as research has revealed that emotional reactions may not distinguish liars from truth-tellers as reliably as once thought, thus any differences in non-verbal cues exhibited by liars versus truthtellers may be better supported by other theories (Hartwig, 2012).…”

Section: Purported Versus Valid Cues Used To Detect Deceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Truth and Deception in Informants' Accounts of Criminal Admissions

Boydell¹

2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Informants who report admissions to crime can be powerful and dangerous players in the criminal justice system. Some informants, such as jailhouse informants, are considered deceitful, in part because they can receive incentives to report criminal admissions. However, little research has examined the nature of information that informants provide. In particular, no recent published research has examined whether there are valid behavioural cues that distinguish deceptive from truthful informants. In addition, no published study to date has explored whether informants' reports and demeanours are affected by the incentives that they receive. Participants in this study either did or did not hear a criminal admission and then were interviewed one week later about details of the admission they had allegedly heard. Some participants were offered an incentive to report the criminal admission in a way that appeared accurate and forthcoming. The results of this study suggest that there may be behavioural cues emitted during the reporting of criminal admissions that distinguish truthful from deceptive informants. However, the direction of differences for some cues may deviate from other types of witnesses to crime. In addition, the findings of this study indicate that being offered an incentive may induce informants to emit cues during the reporting of criminal admissions that make them appear more truthful, regardless of whether or not they are actually telling the truth. The findings of this study raise concerns about whether informants' honesty should be assessed in the same way as other witnesses, and about potentially negative consequences of offering incentives to informants in exchange for their reports of criminal admissions.

show abstract

Detecting Deception from Emotional and Unemotional Cues

Cited by 144 publications

References 20 publications

Effects of the duration of expressions on the recognition of microexpressions

Effects of the duration of expressions on the recognition of microexpressions

Does “lie to me” lie to you? An evaluation of facial clues to high-stakes deception

Truth and Deception in Informants' Accounts of Criminal Admissions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About