Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers

This research was formally endorsed by the National Police College of Spain, the Behavior and Law Foundation, and the Promoción y Divulgación Científica, S. L. company. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the supporters.

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Masip Pallejá, Jaume, Martínez, Carmen, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Sánchez Hernández, Nuria, Herrero Alonso, María Carmen, Ibabe, Izaskun
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2018
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Salamanca (USAL)
Repositorio:GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca
OAI Identifier:oai:gredos.usal.es:10366/136280
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10366/136280
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Deception
Cognitive science
Lie detection
Applied psychology
Consistency
Criminology
Military intelligence and security service
Interviewing
Police
Deception cues
Cognitive load
Evasive answers
id ES_c4ee9acfe23652f5de1a31427c2e9fe2
oai_identifier_str oai:gredos.usal.es:10366/136280
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officersMasip Pallejá, JaumeMartínez, CarmenBlandón-Gitlin, IrisSánchez Hernández, NuriaHerrero Alonso, María CarmenIbabe, IzaskunDeceptionCognitive scienceLie detectionApplied psychologyConsistencyCriminologyMilitary intelligence and security serviceInterviewingPoliceDeception cuesCognitive loadEvasive answersThis research was formally endorsed by the National Police College of Spain, the Behavior and Law Foundation, and the Promoción y Divulgación Científica, S. L. company. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the supporters.[EN]Previous research has shown that inconsistencies across repeated interviews do not indicate deception because liars deliberately tend to repeat the same story. However, when a strategic interview approach that makes it difficult for liars to use the repeat strategy is used, both consistency and evasive answers differ significantly between truth tellers and liars, and statistical software (binary logistic regression analyses) can reach high classification rates (Masip et al., 2016b). Yet, if the interview procedure is to be used in applied settings the decision process will be made by humans, not statistical software. To address this issue, in the current study, 475 college students (Experiment 1) and 142 police officers (Experiment 2) were instructed to code and use consistency, evasive answers, or a combination or both before judging the veracity of Masip et al.’s (2016b) interview transcripts. Accuracy rates were high (60% to over 90%). Evasive answers yielded higher rates than consistency, and the combination of both these cues produced the highest accuracy rates in identifying both truthful and deceptive statements. Uninstructed participants performed fairly well (around 75% accuracy), apparently because they spontaneously used consistency and evasive answers. The pattern of resultswas the same among students, all officers, and veteran officers only, and shows that inconsistencies between interviews and evasive answers reveal deception when a strategic interview approach that hinders the repeat strategy is used.Junta de Castilla y León. Consejería de Educación. Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigación (Ref.: SA086U14)Matthias Gamer201820182018info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10366/136280reponame:GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamancainstname:Universidad de Salamanca (USAL)InglésSA086U14Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:gredos.usal.es:10366/1362802026-06-07T06:28:51Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
title Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
spellingShingle Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
Masip Pallejá, Jaume
Deception
Cognitive science
Lie detection
Applied psychology
Consistency
Criminology
Military intelligence and security service
Interviewing
Police
Deception cues
Cognitive load
Evasive answers
title_short Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
title_full Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
title_fullStr Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
title_full_unstemmed Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
title_sort Learning to detect deception from evasive answers and inconsistencies across repeated interviews: a study with lay respondents and police officers
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Masip Pallejá, Jaume
Martínez, Carmen
Blandón-Gitlin, Iris
Sánchez Hernández, Nuria
Herrero Alonso, María Carmen
Ibabe, Izaskun
author Masip Pallejá, Jaume
author_facet Masip Pallejá, Jaume
Martínez, Carmen
Blandón-Gitlin, Iris
Sánchez Hernández, Nuria
Herrero Alonso, María Carmen
Ibabe, Izaskun
author_role author
author2 Martínez, Carmen
Blandón-Gitlin, Iris
Sánchez Hernández, Nuria
Herrero Alonso, María Carmen
Ibabe, Izaskun
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Deception
Cognitive science
Lie detection
Applied psychology
Consistency
Criminology
Military intelligence and security service
Interviewing
Police
Deception cues
Cognitive load
Evasive answers
topic Deception
Cognitive science
Lie detection
Applied psychology
Consistency
Criminology
Military intelligence and security service
Interviewing
Police
Deception cues
Cognitive load
Evasive answers
description This research was formally endorsed by the National Police College of Spain, the Behavior and Law Foundation, and the Promoción y Divulgación Científica, S. L. company. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the supporters.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018
2018
2018
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10366/136280
url http://hdl.handle.net/10366/136280
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv SA086U14
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Matthias Gamer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Matthias Gamer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca
instname:Universidad de Salamanca (USAL)
instname_str Universidad de Salamanca (USAL)
reponame_str GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca
collection GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869418945024360448
score 15.301603

Similares en LA Referencia