Original Article

Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 339-351

First online:

Deception Detection Expertise

  • Gary D. BondAffiliated withDepartment of Social Sciences, Winston-Salem State UniversityDepartment of Psychology, Winston-Salem State University Email author 


A lively debate between Bond and Uysal (2007, Law and Human Behavior, 31, 109–115) and O’Sullivan (2007, Law and Human Behavior, 31, 117–123) concerns whether there are experts in deception detection. Two experiments sought to (a) identify expert(s) in detection and assess them twice with four tests, and (b) study their detection behavior using eye tracking. Paroled felons produced videotaped statements that were presented to students and law enforcement personnel. Two experts were identified, both female Native American BIA correctional officers. Experts were over 80% accurate in the first assessment, and scored at 90% accuracy in the second assessment. In Signal Detection analyses, experts showed high discrimination, and did not evidence biased responding. They exploited nonverbal cues to make fast, accurate decisions. These highly-accurate individuals can be characterized as experts in deception detection.


Dynamic eye tracking Deception detection Nonverbal cues Expertise Novices Cues