Getting into the Minds of Pairs of Liars and Truth Tellers: An Examination of Their Strategies

Abstract

Abstract:We examined the strategies used by 20 pairs of liars and 20 pairs of truth tellers when they were given the opportunity to prepare themselves for an interview in which they would be questioned about their whereabouts during a given period of time. More lying than truth telling pairs prepared themselves for the interviews. The truth tellers and liars who did prepare themselves used different verbal strategies but the same nonverbal strategies. Regarding verbal strategies, truth tellers were predominantly concerned with telling everything they could remember. In contrast, liars thought of answers they could give to possible questions but also decided to be vague so that they would not contradict each other. Regarding nonverbal strategies, both truth tellers and liars tried to suppress nervous behaviours. These findings explain why truth tellers are typically more detailed than liars but also why liars are typically equally consistent as truth tellers, at least when answering questions they have anticipated. Implications for interview techniques to detect deceit are discussed.Keywords: liars' and truth tellers verbal ane nonverbal strategies, lie detection.In their attempts to detect lies it will benefit criminal investigators to obtain insight into how truth tellers and liars prepare themselves for their interviews . This insight could predict what truth tellers and liars say and how they behave during an interview, and criminal investigators could use this insight to develop effective theory-based lie detection protocols. Given the importance, it is surprising that truth tellers' and liars' strategies to appear credible in an interview have been understudied for a long time (DePaulo, Lindsay, Malone, Muhlenbruck, Charlton, & Cooper, 2003). However, DePaulo et al.'s (2003) plea for research into this area has resulted in several studies (Colwell, Hiscock-Anisman, Memon, Woods, & Michlik, 2006;Granhag & Strömwall, 2002;Strömwall, Granhag, & Landström, 2007;Strömwall, Hartwig, & Granhag, 2006).The present strategies study differed from the previous studies in two important ways. First, previous studies concentrated on the strategies developed by individual truth tellers and liars whereas we focused on pairs of truth tellers and pairs of liars. We believe that this reflects an important aspect of real life, because criminals often work in groups or networks rather than alone. Second, after being interviewed, we asked the truth tellers and liars whether there were awkward moments during the interview that could have jeopardised their credibility. In theory, truth tellers and liars face the same task during the interview: They both need to convince an interviewer that they are innocent Hartwig, Granhag, Strömwall, Wolf, Vrij, Roos af Hjelmsater, 2008). However, when pairs of truth tellers and pairs of liars are given the opportunity to prepare themselves for an interview, they are likely to react differently. Pairs of liars will realise that it is crucial to plan and discuss together the facts of their fabric...

‘What Would You Say if You Were Guilty?’ Suspects' Strategies During a Hypothetical Behavior Analysis Interview Concerning a Serious Crime

“…Also, liars may feel that if they say too much, they may give their lies away (Vrij, 2008); that is why they indicated that they would tell an uncomplicated story with few details. This finding is consistent with previous research (Colwell et al, 2006;Vrij, Mann et al, 2010;but see Hartwig et al, 2007) as well as with theoretical considerations.…”

“…Recently, deception scholars have turned their attention to the strategies that truth tellers and liars use to be convincing during an interview (Colwell, Hiscock-Anisman, Memon, Woods, & Michlik, 2006;Hartwig, Granhag, & Strömwall, 2007;Hartwig, Granhag, Strömwall, & Doering, 2010;Hines et al, 2010;Strömwall, Granhag, & Landström, 2007;Strömwall, Hartwig, & Granhag, 2006;Vrij, Mann, Leal, & Granhag, 2010). The reason for this is that knowledge about these strategies may be useful to anticipate the verbal and nonverbal behaviors of truth tellers and liars.…”

“…The main results are summarized in Table 2. No consistent patterns have emerged for gaze and details, with contradictory results across studies (Colwell et al, 2006;Hartwig et al, 2007;Hines et al, 2010;Strömwall et al, 2006;Vrij, Mann et al, 2010).…”

“…Research shows that owing to the illusion of transparency (people's tendency to overestimate the extent to which others can discern their internal states; Gilovich, Savitsky, & Medvec, 1998), the course of knowledge effect (people's tendency to attribute to others some awareness of information that is privy to themselves; Camerer, Loewenstein, & Weber, 1989), and the belief in a just world (the belief that people get what they deserve; Lerner, 1980), innocent suspects Strömwall et al (2006Strömwall et al ( , 2007; and Vrij, Mann, et al (2010). often believe that 'the truth will ultimately shine through' and that there is no need to take explicit measures to demonstrate that they are innocent. For example, Kassin and Norwick (2004) found that innocent suspects were more likely than guilty suspects to waive their Miranda rights just because they were innocent and had nothing to hide (see also Kassin, 2005).…”

“…This might make innocent suspects less likely to manipulate their behavior to look innocent during the interview. Indeed, truth tellers are less inclined than liars to prepare a strategy prior to the interview, tend more strongly than liars to simply describe the facts just as they happened, and report fewer strategies than guilty suspects (Hartwig et al, 2007;Hines et al, 2010;Liu et al, 2010;Strömwall et al, 2006;Vrij, Mann et al, 2010). More innocent than guilty interviewees may display BAI indicators of guilt because, unlike innocent interviewees, guilty interviewees might try to suppress the BAI guilt indicators; and more guilty than innocent interviewees may display BAI indicators of innocence because, unlike innocent interviewees, guilty interviewees might purposefully try to show the BAI innocence indicators.…”