Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lie Detection in Sex Crime Investigations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Criminal Investigations of Sexual Offenses

Abstract

The introduction of Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA), a verbal veracity assessment tool to assess (child) sexual abuse cases, changed the focus from nonverbal lie detection to verbal lie detection. However, CBCA has shortcomings. We first introduce CBCA together with four shortcomings. We then discuss researchers’ efforts to resolve these shortcomings. In summary, the four shortcomings and resolutions are as follows: First, CBCA-coding is complicated, but a less complicated method, called Reality Monitoring, is available. Second, all CBCA criteria are cues to truthfulness (cues more frequently reported by truth tellers than by lie tellers) and researchers are currently examining cues to deceit. Third, CBCA employs a passive interview protocol but active interview tools that exploit differences between truth tellers and lie tellers in their cognitive processing and their strategies to appear sincere have been introduced. Fourth, CBCA does not have cut-off scores for making truth/lie decisions and researchers are currently developing within-subjects measures to resolve this problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R., & Fariña, F. (2015). Undeutsch hypothesis and criteria based content analysis: A meta-analytic review. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 7, 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R., Fariña, F., & Vilarino, M. (2016). Criteria-based content analysis (CBCA) reality criteria in adults: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 16, 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, J. P., & Kooi, B. (2004). The gap between training and research in the detection of deception. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 6, 77–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgements. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, J. K. (2018). Micro-expressions are not the best way to catch a liar. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christ, S. E., Van Essen, D. C., Watson, J. M., Brubaker, L. E., & McDermott, K. B. (2009). The contributions of prefrontal cortex and executive control to deception: Evidence from activation likelihood estimate meta-analyses. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1557–1566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. A., & Lancaster, G. (2017). Suspects’ consistency in statements concerning two events when different question formats are used. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 14, 74–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. (2018). Police officers’ perceptions of statement inconsistency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45, 644–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deeb, H., Vrij, A., & Leal, S. (2020). The effects of a Model Statement on information elicitation and deception detection in multiple interviews. Acta Psychologica, 207, 103080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. L., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P. (1985). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics and marriage. W. W. Norton. (Reprinted in 1992, 2001 and 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. R., Michael, S. W., Meissner, C. A., & Brandon, S. E. (2013). Validating a new assessment method for deception detection: Introducing a psychologically based credibility assessment tool. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2, 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewens, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2016). Using the reverse order technique with non-native speakers or through an interpreter. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 242–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. P., Brewer, N., & Mitchell, G. (2009). The relation between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony: Legal versus cognitive explanations. In R. Bull, T. Valentine, & T. Williamson (Eds.), Handbook of psychology of investigative interviewing: Current developments and future directions (pp. 121–136). John Wiley & Sons.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2008). A new theoretical perspective on deception detection: On the psychology of instrumental mind-reading. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 189–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2015). The strategic use of evidence (SUE) technique: A conceptual overview. In P. A. Granhag, A. Vrij, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Deception detection: Current challenges and new approaches (pp. 231–251). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2000). Effects of preconceptions on deception detection and new answers to why lie catchers often fail. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 6, 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Jonsson, A. C. (2003). Partners in crime: How liars in collusion betray themselves. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 848–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. (2007). Guilty and innocent suspects’ strategies during police interrogations. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 13, 213–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., & Luke, T. (2014). Strategic use of evidence during investigative interviews: The state of the science. In D. C. Raskin, C. R. Honts, & J. C. Kircher (Eds.), Credibility assessment: scientific research and applications (pp. 1–36). Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauch, V., Sporer, S. L., Michael, S. W., & Meissner, C. A. (2016). Does training improve the detection of deception? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 43, 283–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauch, V., Sporer, S. L., Masip, J., & Blandón-Gitlin, I. (2017). Can credibility criteria be assessed reliably? A meta-analysis of criteria-based content analysis. Psychological Assessment, 29, 819–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, C., Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Hope, L., & Satchell, L. (2020). Veracity is in the eye of the beholder: A lens model examination of consistency and deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 996–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John E. Reid & Associates. (n.d.) Training programs. http://www.reid.com/training_programs/r_training.html.

  • Johnson, M. K. (1988). Reality monitoring: An experimental phenomenological approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 390–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. K. (2006). Memory and reality. American Psychologist, 61, 760–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, S., Brimbal, L., Wallace, D. B., Kassin, S. M., Hartwig, M., & Street, C. N. H. (2019). A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection? Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 16, 222–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassin, S. M., & Fong, C. T. (1999). “I’m innocent!”: Effects of training on judgments of truth and deception in the interrogation room. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 499–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Köhnken, G. (2004). Statement Validity Analysis and the ‘detection of the truth’. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), Deception detection in forensic contexts (pp. 41–63). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Köhnken, G., & Steller, M. (1988). The evaluation of the credibility of child witness statements in German procedural system. In G. Davies & J. Drinkwater (Eds.), The child witness: Do the courts abuse children?. (Issues in Criminological and Legal Psychology, no. 13) (pp. 37–45).

    Google Scholar 

  • Leins, D., Fisher, R. P., Pludwinsky, L., Robertson, B., & Mueller, D. H. (2014). Interview protocols to facilitate human intelligence sources’ recollections of meetings. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 926–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mac Giolla, E., Granhag, P. A., & Liu-Jönsson, M. (2013). Markers of good planning behaviour as a cue for separating true and false intent. PsyCh Journal, 2, 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, S., Vrij, A., & Bull, R. (2004). Detecting true lies: Police officers' ability to detect deceit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masip, J., Sporer, S., Garrido, E., & Herrero, C. (2005). The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: A review of the empirical evidence. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 11, 99–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner, C. A., & Lyles, A. M. (2019). Title IX investigations: The importance of training investigators in evidence-based approaches to interviewing. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8, 387–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner, C. A., Surmon-Böhr, F., Oleszkiewicz, S., & Alison, L. J. (2017). Developing an evidence-based perspective on interrogation: A review of the U.S. government’s high-value detainee interrogation group research program. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23, 438–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahari, G. (2019). Verifiability approach: Applications in different judgmental settings. In T. Docan-Morgan (Ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Deceptive Communication (pp. 213–225). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nahari, G., Ashkenazi, T., Fisher, R. P., Granhag, P. A., Hershkovitz, I., Masip, J., Meijer, E., Nisin, Z., Sarid, N., Taylor, P. J., Verschuere, B., & Vrij, A. (2019). Language of Lies: Urgent issues and prospects in verbal lie detection research. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palena, N., Caso, L., & Vrij, A. (2019). Detecting lies via a theme-selection strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, section Forensic and Legal Psychology, 9, 2775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palena, N., Caso, L., Vrij, A., & Nahari, G. (2020). The verifiability approach: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.09.001.

  • Rankell, A. (1972). Reliability of evidence. Beckmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raskin, D. C., & Esplin, P. W. (1991). Statement validity assessment: Interview procedures and content analysis of children's statements of sexual abuse. Behavioral Assessment, 13, 265–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, J. E., & Arther, R. O. (1953). Behavior symptoms of lie-detector subjects. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 44, 104–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruby, C. L., & Brigham, J. C. (1998). Can criteria-based content analysis distinguish between true and false statements of African-American speakers? Law and Human Behavior, 22, 369–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schemmel, J., Maier, B. G., & Volbert, R. (2020). Verbal baselining: Within-subjects consistency of CBCA scores across different truthful and fabricated accounts. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 12, 35–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Hillman, J., Granhag, P. A., & Fisher, R. P. (2014). ‘We’ll take it from here’: The effect of changing interviewers in information gathering interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 908–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporer, S. L. (1997). The less travelled road to truth: Verbal cues in deception detection in accounts of fabricated and self-experienced events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 373–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporer, S. L. (2004). Reality monitoring and detection of deception. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), Deception detection in forensic contexts (pp. 64–102). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sporer, S. L. (2016). Deception and cognitive load: Expanding our horizon with a working memory model. Frontiers in Psychology: Hypothesis and Theory, 7, article 420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steller, M. (1989). Recent developments in statement analysis. In J. C. Yuille (Ed.), Credibility assessment (pp. 135–154). Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steller, M., & Köhnken, G. (1989). Criteria-based content analysis. In D. C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence (pp. 217–245). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2003). How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 9, 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strömwall, L. A., Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2004). Practitioners' beliefs about deception. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), Deception detection in forensic contexts (pp. 229–250). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Undeutsch, U. (1982). Statement reality analysis. In A. Trankell (Ed.), Reconstructing the past: The role of psychologists in criminal trials (pp. 27–56). Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verigin, B., Meijer, E. H., Vrij, A., & Zauzig, L. (2019). The interaction of truthful and deceptive information. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 26, 367–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volbert, R., & Steller, M. (2014). Is this testimony truthful, fabricated, or based on false memory? Credibility assessment 25 years after Steller and Köhnken (1989). European Psychologist, 19, 207–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vredeveldt, A., van Koppen, P. J., & Granhag, P. A. (2014). The inconsistent suspect: A systematic review of different types of consistency in truth tellers and liars. In R. Bull (Ed.), Investigative interviewing (pp. 183–207). Springer Science+Business Media.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2014). Interviewing to detect deception. European Psychologist, 19, 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2016). Baselining as a lie detection method. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 1112–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2018). Verbal lie detection tools from an applied perspective. In J. P. Rosenfeld (Ed.), Detecting concealed information and deception: Recent developments (pp. 297–321). Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2019). Deception and truth detection when analysing nonverbal and verbal cues. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33, 160–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., & Fisher, R. P. (2020). Unraveling the misconception about deception and nervous behaviour. Frontiers in Psychology, section Personality and Social Psychology, 11, 1377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 110–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., & Nahari, G. (2019). The verifiability approach. In J. J. Dickinson, N. S. Compo, R. N. Carol, B. L. Schwartz, & M. R. McCauley (Eds.), Evidence-based investigative interviewing (pp. 116–133). Routledge Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., & Vrij, S. (2020). Complications travel: A cross-cultural comparison of the proportion of complication as a verbal cue to deceit. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 17, 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Evans, H., Akehurst, L., & Mann, S. (2004). Rapid judgements in assessing verbal and nonverbal cues: Their potential for deception researchers and lie detection. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Hillman, J., & Sperry, K. (2009). Outsmarting the liars: The benefit of asking unanticipated questions. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 159–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2014). Eliciting reliable information in investigative interviews. Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 129–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Fisher, R., Blank, H., Leal, S., & Mann, S. (2016). A cognitive approach to elicit nonverbal and verbal cues of deceit. In J. W. van Prooijen & P. A. M. van Lange (Eds.), Cheating, corruption, and concealment: The roots of dishonest behavior (pp. 284–310). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Fisher, R., & Blank, H. (2017a). A cognitive approach to lie detection: A meta-analysis. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Dalton, G., Jo, E., Shaboltas, A., Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2017b). Using the model statement to elicit information and cues to deceit in interpreter-based interviews. Acta Psychologica, 177, 44–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., & Fisher, R. P. (2018a). Verbal deception and the Model Statement as a lie detection tool. Frontiers in Psychiatry, section Forensic Psychiatry, 9, 492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., Mann, S., Dalton, G., Jo, E., Shaboltas, A., Khaleeva, M., Granskaya, J., & Houston, K. (2018b). Sketching as a technique to elicit information and cues to deceit in interpreter-based interviews. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7, 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Jupe, L., & Harvey, A. (2018c). Within-subjects verbal lie detection measures: A comparison between total detail and proportion of complications. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 23, 265–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Deeb, H., Chan, S., Khader, M., Chai, W., & Chin, J. (2019). Lying about flying: The efficacy of the information protocol and model statement for detecting deceit. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 241–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., Mann, S., Deeb, H., Jo, E., Castro Campos, C., & Hamzeh, S. (2020a). The efficacy of using countermeasures in a Model Statement interview. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 12, 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P., & Deeb, H. (2020b). Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 628–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK

    Aldert Vrij

Authors
  1. Aldert Vrij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aldert Vrij .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Work and Criminology, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada

    Nadine Deslauriers-Varin

  2. Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Craig Bennell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vrij, A. (2021). Lie Detection in Sex Crime Investigations. In: Deslauriers-Varin, N., Bennell, C. (eds) Criminal Investigations of Sexual Offenses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79968-7_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79968-7_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-79967-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-79968-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation