Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit

Applied Cognitive Psychology

et al. 2021

Self Cite

The current experiment examined the effects of combining two interview techniques on information elicitation and lie detection in multiple interviews. Participants were interviewed online over three weeks. Two‐thirds of the participants (n = 114) were presented with the model statement (MS) interview technique in Interview 1 and were asked to sketch and narrate in Interview 2 (MS‐Sketch condition) or vice versa (Sketch‐MS condition). In Interview 3, all participants provided a free recall. The remaining one‐third of participants (n = 61) provided only a free recall in the three interviews. Truth tellers reported more information than lie tellers in all three interviews. In Interview 2, the Sketch‐MS condition elicited more new information and cues to deceit than the other conditions. The results imply that veracity effects are consistent across multiple interviews and the MS is effective for eliciting information and cues to deceit when preceded by an initial recall.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All verbal interviews were transcribed and coded separately for each session. The sketches were not coded, because previous research has shown that sketches made while narrating guide interviewees' verbal reports rather than act as stand‐alone lie detection tools (see Vrij, Mann, et al, 2020). Details were coded as PLATO details.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining the model statement and the sketching while narrating interview techniques to elicit information and detect lies in multiple interviews

Applied Cognitive Psychology

et al. 2021

Self Cite

“…Interviewees may be asked to either sketch and then to narrate or to sketch while narrating Eastwood et al, 2019;Marlow & Hilbourne, 2011). Findings in the deception literature generally overlap for those two methods of introducing sketches and show that truth tellers provide more verbal details than lie tellers (Izotovas et al, 2020;Vrij et al, 2020). As truth tellers report an experienced event, whereas lie tellers fabricate at least some parts of the reported event, truth tellers' verbal reports of the event are likely to be richer than lie tellers' verbal reports (Amado et al, 2015).…”

Section: The Use Of Sketches To Elicit Information and Cues To Deceitmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Further, sketching typically leads to the provision of spatial information as the interviewee must situate each person or object in a location on the sketch. In contrast, verbal reports do not require interviewees to spontaneously locate persons and objects (Vrij et al, 2020).…”

Section: The Use Of Sketches To Elicit Information and Cues To Deceitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, lie tellers may be less willing to provide information than truth tellers out of fear that the information gives leads to investigators that they can check (Nahari et al, 2014). Accordingly, truth tellers report more verbal details and complications than lie tellers in sketch-based interviews (Mac Giolla et al, 2017;Vrij et al, 2012;Vrij et al, 2020).…”

Section: The Use Of Sketches To Elicit Information and Cues To Deceitmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping Details to Elicit Information and Cues to Deceit: The Effects of Map Richness1

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Background: Investigators often use maps in forensic interviews to verify a route that was taken by a suspect to obtain additional information, and to assess credibility. Method: We examined the effects of the level of map richness on the elicitation of information and cues to deceit. A total of 112 participants completed a mock secret mission and were asked to tell the truth (to a friendly agent) or to lie (to a hostile agent) about it in an interview. In phase 1 of the interview, all participants provided a verbal free recall of the mission. In phase 2, half of the participants were given a detailed map that included all street names and landmarks of the city where they completed the mission (zoomed in to 80%), and the other half were given a less detailed map that included the names of only major streets and landmarks (zoomed in to 60%). All participants were asked to verbally describe the mission and the route taken while sketching on the map. Results: Compared to lie tellers, truth tellers provided more location, action, temporal, and object details and complications in phase 1, and new person, location, action, and object details and complications in phase 2. Map richness did not have an effect on the amount of information elicited and had an equal effect on truth tellers and lie tellers. Conclusions: This initial experiment in this research area suggests that investigators do not have to worry about the exact level of map detailedness when introducing maps in interviews.

Sketching routes to elicit information and cues to deceit

Applied Cognitive Psychology

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Sketching while narrating involves describing an event while sketching on a blank paper (self-generated sketch) or on a printed map. We compared the effects of selfgenerated sketches and printed maps on information elicitation and lie detection.Participants (N = 211) carried out a mock mission and were instructed to tell the truth or to lie about it in an online interview. In the first phase of the interview, all participants provided a free recall. In the second phase, participants provided another free recall or verbally described the mission while sketching on a blank paper or on a printed map. Truth tellers provided richer accounts than lie tellers.Larger effect sizes emerged for the self-generated sketch condition than for the printed map and free recall conditions. This suggests that self-generated sketches are more effective lie detection tools when information on routes and locations is sought.