High-Stakes Lies: Verbal and Nonverbal Cues to Deception in Public Appeals for Help with Missing or Murdered Relatives

Wagstaff

Psychology, Crime & Law

2014

Self Cite

To date, the majority of investigations in to accuracy in detecting deception have used low stakes lies as stimulus materials, and findings from these studies suggest that people are generally poor at detecting deception. The research presented here utilised real life, high stakes lies as stimulus materials, to investigate the accuracy of police and non-police observers in detecting deception. It was hypothesised that both police and non-police observers would achieve above chance levels of accuracy in detecting deception, that police officers would be more accurate at detecting deception than non-police observers, that confidence in veracity judgements would be positively related to accuracy, and that consensus judgements would predict veracity. 107 observers (70 police officers and 37 non-police participants) watched 36 videos of people lying or telling the truth in an extremely high stakes, real life situation. Police observers achieved mean accuracy in detecting deception of 72%, non-police observers achieved 68% mean accuracy, and confidence in veracity judgements were positively related to accuracy. Consensus judgements correctly predicted veracity in 92% of cases.

Section: Accuracy In Detecting High Stakes Liesmentioning

confidence: 99%

High stakes lies: police and non-police accuracy in detecting deception

Wagstaff

Psychology, Crime & Law

2014

Self Cite

“…All the appeals were made within a short time frame after the relative went missing or was murdered. For a full description of the sample used in the present study, and the criteria used to determine whether ground truth SUBJECTIVE CUES TO DECEPTION IN PUBLIC APPEALS had been established, see Wright Whelan et al (2013). As before, the response sheet given to each observer contained one statement for each cue.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A second, and related, way of interpreting some of these cues in the present cases is in terms of the 'individual behavioural profile' (IBP) account of deception (Wright Whelan et al, 2013). In the context of appeals, and in many high stake situations, honest and deceptive individuals differ not only in terms of whether they are lying, but also whether they have committed a serious criminal act.…”

Section: Subjective Cues To Deception In Public Appealsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also included was one cue noted by the researcher (voice quivering with genuine emotion). A small number of verbal cues were dropped as other research has indicated that they may be more effectively investigated using frequency counts; these were, lists, equivocal language, focusing on others, and statement that does not make sense (Wright Whelan et al, 2013). Another cue, genuine facial expression, was also dropped as it was considered to be the negative equivalent, and, therefore, repetition, of SUBJECTIVE CUES TO DECEPTION IN PUBLIC APPEALS fake facial expression.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in their meta-analysis of cues to deception, DePaulo et al (2003) found that strong motivation to succeed in the lie, and lies about transgressions, factors more likely to be present in high stakes situations, emerged as important moderating factors in the elicitation of prominent cues to deception. Indeed, the small body of existing research investigating real life, high stakes lies, has produced some promising results, and suggests that there may be some useful cues to deception that are more likely to emerge in high stakes situations; for example, an increase in speech dysfluency (Davis, Markus, Walters, Vorus & Connors, 2005;Vrij & Mann, 2001a), and equivocal language (Adams & Jarvis, 2006;Wright Whelan, Wagstaff & Wheatcroft 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Subjective Cues to Deception/Honesty in a High Stakes Situation: An Exploratory Approach

Wagstaff

The Journal of Psychology

2014

Self Cite

Police officers' beliefs about, and use of, cues to deception

Journal Invest Psychology

2017

Self Cite

Meta-analytic findings indicate that people, including police officers, are generally poor at detecting low-stakes deception. Related to this, investigations of behaviours that people reportedly use to make truth or lie judgements tend to conclude that people rely on incorrect stereotypes. However, consistent findings suggest that police officers are able to detect high-stakes deception; this implies that, at least in some contexts, police officers utilise reliable cues to deception. The research presented here was an investigation of cues to deception used by police officers (N = 69), when making veracity decisions about real world, high-stakes communications. Data were collected on both free report cues, and also prescribed cues that were known (from previous research), to discriminate between liars and truth-tellers in the communications that the police officers observed.Officers free reported using cues related to verbal content, emotion, body language, eyes, vocal cues, and external cues. Most prescribed cues were self-reportedly used correctly by large majorities of the officers, suggesting that they may not rely on inaccurate stereotypes.Self-report use of categories of free report cues, and prescribed cues, was not related to accuracy in detecting deception. As people may not always be aware of the behaviours on which their judgements are based, the relationships between some of the behaviours actually displayed in the communications, and group accuracy in detecting deception in those communications, were also investigated. Group accuracy was related to the presence of subjective, emotion-related cues in the communications.