Drop the Small Talk When Establishing Baseline Behaviour in Interviews

Abstract

The present experiment investigated the behavioural patterns of interviewees when comparing their baseline behaviour, prior to the interview, with their behaviour during the investigative interview. Similar to what has been advised in the police literature, the truthful baseline behaviour was established prior to the interview through non-threatening questions. The investigative part of the interview then followed in which the interviewee was aware that they would be assessed on whether they were lying. During the investigative part, interviewees either discussed the job that they had (truth tellers, n = 128) or pretended to have (liars, n = 115). Findings revealed that both liars and truth tellers' behavioural patterns differed between the baseline behaviour and the investigative part of the interview.The findings suggest small talk should not be used as a baseline comparison with the investigative part of the interview when determining if the interviewee is being deceitful. An alternative way of using a baseline lie detection method, the comparable truth method, is discussed.

Detecting deception through small talk and comparable truth baselines

“…We found that similarity scores did not differ between truth tellers and liars for participants in the small talk condition. This result is similar to that obtained by Ewens et al (), who found that both truth tellers and liars showed differences in the amount of hard thinking and behavioural control between two phases of the interview. Our results therefore reject the efficacy of a small talk baseline procedure as proposed by Frank et al, () and by Inbau et al, () as in such a procedure truth tellers and liars would appear equally deceptive.…”

“…We found that similarity scores did not differ between truth tellers and liars for participants in the small talk condition. This result is similar to that obtained by Ewens et al (2014), who found that both truth tellers and liars showed differences in the amount of hard thinking and behavioural control between two phases of the interview.…”

“…These techniques have been developed within the academic setting. On the contrary, a strategy frequently proposed and used within the police culture is the use of a small talk baseline (Ewens, Vrij, Jang, & Jo, ; Frank, Yarbrough, & Ekman, ; Inbau, Reid, Buckley, & Jayne, ). The core of the baseline technique is that interviewers should in first instance evaluate interviewees' baseline behaviour using nonthreatening questions (small talk) and then assess if differences in behaviours between this phase and the investigative phase of the interview arise.…”

“…These techniques have been developed within the academic setting. On the contrary, a strategy frequently proposed and used within the police culture is the use of a small talk baseline (Ewens, Vrij, Jang, & Jo, 2014;Frank, Authors note. We would like to thank Guido Carlotto, Monica Marciali, and Lara De Mizio for their help with data collection.…”

Using baseline to diagnose internal states? Listen closely

“…To date, only two published studies have examined the utility of attending to a set of behaviours to establish and evaluate baseline, and these studies focused on baselining only for the purpose of detecting deception (Ewens, Vrij, Jang, & Jo, ; Palena, Caso, Vrij, & Orthey, ). Ewens et al () studied three types of cues that might constitute a baseline: gross measures of how hard a respondent appeared to be thinking, how much a respondent appeared to be controlling his/her hand and body movements, and how nervous the respondent appeared. The authors did not analyse nervousness because it could not be measured reliably.…”