Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss unresolved problems that are reflected in the social scientific research on the linguistic detection of deception in statements, with particular attention to problems of methodology, practical utility for law enforcement statement analysts, and epistemology.

The author reviewed the design, data, statistical calculations, and findings of English language peer‐reviewed studies of the linguistic detection of deception in statements. In some cases, the author re‐analyzed the study data.

Social scientific research holds promise for the development of new methods of linguistic detection of deception that are more thoroughly validated than the linguistic methods law enforcement investigators have been using for many years. Nonetheless, published studies reflect one or more of the following sources of weakness in developing and evaluating detection models: the use of analytes (statements) of uncertain validity; the problematic universality and practical utility of linguistic variables; the widespread use of deficient proportion‐of‐stimuli‐correct “hit rate” calculations to assess the accuracy of detection methods; a possibly irresolvable epistemological limit to the ability of any linguistic detection method to prove deception without confirmation by means external to the analysis.

The research was limited to English language studies in the linguistic detection of deception literature and to the re‐calculation of data in the research literature. Whether the paper has implications for future studies depends on the success of two arguments that are made: the published research projects in the field reflect one or more of four methodological problems that create doubt about the validity and/or the practical utility of their results; and the linguistic detection of deception is subject to an epistemological problem which theoretically limits the ability of any linguistic method of detection to establish with certainty the status of any particular questioned statement.

This is the first published paper to identify and discuss a possibly irresolvable epistemological issue in the detection of deception by linguistic means, as well as unresolved issues of methodology and of utility to law enforcement analysts that characterize the research and the detection models in this field. It is also the first published paper to deconstruct the simple hit rate (and its variants) in order to demonstrate its deficiencies.

Deception detection is instrumental in business management but professionals differ widely in terms of deception detection performance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the genetic basis of deception detection performance using the classic twin study design and address the research question: how much variance in individual differences in deception detection performance can be accounted for by the variance in genetics vs environmental influences?

In total, 192 twins, with 65 pairs of monozygotic (identical) twins and 31 pairs of dizygotic (fraternal) twins participated in an experiment. A series of behavioral genetic analyses were performed.

The variability in deception detection performance was largely determined by differences in shared and non-shared environments.

The subjects were solicited during the Twins Days Festival so the sample selection and data collection were limited to the natural settings in the field. In addition, the risks and rewards associated with deception detection performance in the study are pale in comparison with those in practice.

Deception detection performance may be improved through training programs. Corporations should continue funding training programs for deception detection.

This is the first empirical study that examines the complementary influences of genetics and environment on people’s ability to detect deception.

The purpose of this paper is to present a review of the deception detection literature that arrives at a different conclusion from the one presented by King and Dunn. Specifically, the authors’ review shows that people can detect deception at significantly above chance accuracy in policing environments. A new paradigm for deception detection is also discussed.

An extensive literature review was conducted.

People can detect deception at levels that exceed chance in a variety of police‐related environments when an ecological approach to detecting deception is adopted.

The authors’ review suggests that it is time for deception detection training and manuals to move away from the demeanor‐based systems that are currently dominant and toward coherence and correspondence‐based systems.

The paper presents a perspective that is different from the one advanced by King and Dunn. It also introduces the ecological detection of deception paradigm to the policing literature.

To function effectively, police must separate lies from truth. Police, ideally, would be experts at this task, yet there is debate surrounding whether expertise in detecting deception is possible. Drawing upon literature outside of deception detection, the purpose of this paper is to explore whether subjects making deception judgments can improve their performance.

The sample was 19 students from two graduate-level classes. Subjects viewed six sets of videos over eight weeks. The first five sets displayed individuals reporting whether they cheated on an exam. The sixth set displayed individuals reporting whether they had committed a (mock) robbery. After each video, subjects judged whether the videoed individual was truthful, and then the actual status was revealed.

Subjects’ accuracy improved consistently over the first five sets of videos; from about 69 percent accuracy to about 89 percent accuracy. However, the accuracy for the sixth set of videos dropped dramatically to 46 percent. The results indicate that expertise in deception detection may be possible, but is likely to be limited in terms of generalizability.

The actual environment of police investigations is more variable than the study’s setting. Future studies should integrate inaccurate and incomplete feedback, which are realistic characteristics of investigations.

The findings suggest that, like other areas of expertise, it may be possible to develop expertise in detecting deception through the use of deliberate practice with accurate feedback.

This study combines three literature-substantiated criteria for developing deception detection expertise. The study environment involved regularity. Subjects were deliberately practicing, and subjects received accurate feedback.

The purpose of this study is to explore the views of practicing negotiators on their experiences of deception and their strategies for detecting deceptive behavior. A thematic analysis of interview data complements the existing experimental literature on deception and negotiation. The authors compare the experiences of practicing negotiators with the results found in experimental studies and provide practical recommendations for negotiators and managers regarding the detection of deception.

Data was collected from 19 practicing commercial negotiators in France by way of semi-structured interviews. The transcribed data was analyzed by way of thematic analysis using the software NVivo 12. Experiences and behaviors identified in the negotiation literature as key factors for the detection of deception acted as a coding framework.

A thematic analysis of the data revealed four themes related to the experience of deception that negotiators perceived as particularly important: the frequency, form, interpretation and consequences of deception. Further, the analysis revealed four factors that negotiators believed influenced their ability to detect deceptive communication: physical cues, such as body language and micro-expressions, and verbal cues, including contradictions and inconsistencies, emotional cues and environmental cues. Finally, the strategies described by negotiators to detect deception could be classified according to six themes: careful listening, asking questions, emotional intelligence, intuition, checking consistency and requesting evidence.

This study elicited the views of commercial negotiators without collecting information from their negotiation counterparts. Hence, it was not possible to verify whether the reported detection of deceptive communication was accurate. Because of optimism bias, the participants in the sample were likely to overrate their ability to detect deception. In part, this was helpful because the negotiators spoke freely about their strategies for dealing with deceptive counterparts allowing the identification of techniques to improve the efficacy of detecting deceptive communication.

Participants overwhelmingly expressed that there is a lack of training on deception in negotiation. It is suggested that the results of this study inform the development of training courses on the detection of deception. In particular, it is recommended that training courses should cover the following topics: how to anticipate and avoid deceptive behavior; how to effectively respond to deceptive behavior; the role of emotional intelligence in detecting deceptive behavior; careful listening and asking questions; and the role of intuition in detecting deception.

Prior empirical studies on the detection of deception have not specifically investigated the range of self-reported strategies used by practicing negotiators to detect deceptive communication. This study addresses this gap. This study complements existing experimental works by widening the spectrum of potential variables that play a role in the effective detection of deceptive communication.

With the widespread use of online communications, users are extremely vulnerable to a myriad of deception attempts. This study aims to extend the literature on deception in computer-mediated communication by investigating whether the manner in which popularity information (PI) is presented and media richness affects users’ judgments.

This study developed a randomized, within and 2 × 3 between-subject experimental design. This study analyzed the main effects of PI and media richness on the imitation magnitude of veracity judges and the effect of the interaction between PI and media richness on the imitation magnitude of veracity judges.

The manner in which PI is presented to people affects their tendency to imitate others. Media richness also has a main effect; text-only messages resulted in greater imitation magnitude than those viewed in full audiovisual format. The findings showed an interaction effect between PI and media richness.

The findings of this study contribute to the information systems literature by introducing the notion of herd behavior to judgments of truthfulness and deception. Also, the medium over which PI was presented significantly impacted the magnitude of imitation tendency: PI delivered through text-only medium led to a greater extent of imitation than when delivered in full audiovisual format. This suggests that media richness alters the degree of imitating others’ decisions such that the leaner the medium, the greater the expected extent of imitation.

To influence consumer perceptions, firms often manipulate online product reviews on their own websites or third-party forums by anonymously adding positive reviews, deleting unfavorable reviews or offering rewards to encourage favorable reviews. This study aims to investigate consumer perceptions of online review deceptions and how these perceptions influence their subsequent purchase behavior. In particular, consumers’ awareness, suspicion and detection are studied and specific manipulation tactics are evaluated.

Both qualitative and quantitative studies are relied upon to understand consumer perceptions of online review deceptions. In-depth interviews with 16 experienced online shoppers were conducted to collect the illustrative accounts concerning consumer awareness of online review deceptions, their suspicion, detection and evaluation of different manipulation tactics. A survey of 199 consumers was then followed to validate and corroborate the findings from the qualitative study and generalize the interview results onto the general public.

The results from in-depth interviews suggest that consumers take a negative view toward online review deceptions, but the degree of negativity varies across different manipulation tactics. Moreover, different types of manipulations vary in terms of perceived deceptiveness, ease of detection and unethicality, as well as their effect on consumer purchase intention and perceived helpfulness of online product reviews. The findings from the survey further confirmed the qualitative findings.

The findings have a number of meaningful managerial implications for industry associations and policymakers on whether and how to regulate online review deceptions.

This study applies and extends information manipulation theory and deception detection literature to an online context to increase the richness of the relevant theories. It is among the first to empirically investigate online review deceptions from a consumer’s perspective, as opposed to a firm’s perspective as previous studies have done.

The Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) is a psychophysiological questioning technique that can be used as part of a polygraph examination which purports to assess whether suspects conceal “guilty knowledge” by measuring their physiological responses while responding to a series of multiple choice questions. The present study sets out to consider a number of key issues in relation to the GKT paradigm. Specifically, the following questions were considered: Does response mode matter? Does motivation influence outcome? Are combined physiological measures better than single ones? Does gender have an effect on physiological responsivity during a polygraph examination? Results demonstrated real variations between the physiological measures used. Gender differences were also observed in polygraph response patterns. These findings are discussed in relation to the validity of the Guilty Knowledge Test.

This study aims to describe and analyze the differences in the linguistic styles of honest and dishonest stories.

This paper uses a descriptive study with a multivariate analysis of linguistic categories according to the story. The research analyzed 37 honest stories and 15 dishonest stories produced during actual legal proceedings through software Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC).

The authors find that individuals who engage in deception use a different number of words when they narrate facts. The results suggest a need for additional investigation of the linguistic style approach because of its high applicability and detection accuracy. This approach should be complemented by other types of verbal, nonverbal and psychophysiological deception detection techniques.

Among the limitations, the authors consider length of the stories should be considered and scarce scientific literature in Spanish to compare with outcomes in English.

This research highlights the relevance to include linguistic style in real contexts to differentiate honest and dishonest stories due to objectivity and agility to implement.

Understanding deception as a social behaviour and its psychological processes associated are elements that contribute to people and justice to comprehend it.

Analyzing real statements and discriminate differences in linguistic style, contribute to understand deeply this important behaviour to propose new methodologies and theories to explain it.

This paper aims to systematically compare the textbook‐based criminal justice and psychological literatures on detecting deception in field settings to determine the accuracy of the criminal justice literature in this area.

A total of 18 criminal justice textbooks covering detecting deception were systematically reviewed and coded. The alleged indicators of deception were then compared with the psychological literature on the valid indicators of deception.

Many criminal justice textbooks on interviewing, interrogation, and criminal investigation claim that there are numerous accurate indicators of deception which can be readily used in field settings. The comparison of these claims with the research in psychology indicates that a great deal of the information found in criminal justice textbooks is erroneous. Further review indicates that in controlled studies criminal justice practitioners rarely detect deception at levels greater than chance or comparison groups of non‐practitioners. It is exceedingly difficult to detect deception in field settings without the help of technology or complicated instruments or aids.

Much of the information in criminal justice textbooks on detecting deception is erroneous and may have negatively affected practitioners to the extent that they are unable to detect deception effectively. Textbooks on interviewing, interrogation, and criminal investigation should be circumspect regarding an individual's ability to detect deception in field settings. Texts should refrain from presenting deception detection as a simple and accurate science. Practitioners should be cautious when attempting to detect deception in field settings.

The criminal justice and psychological literatures on detecting deception have not been synthesized before. This information will be useful to criminal justice practitioners who seek to detect deception.