Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 30, Issue 5, pp 603–619

Strategic Use of Evidence During Police Interviews: When Training to Detect Deception Works

  • Maria Hartwig
  • Pär Anders Granhag
  • Leif A. Strömwall
  • Ola Kronkvist
Original Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10979-006-9053-9

Cite this article as:
Hartwig, M., Granhag, P.A., Strömwall, L.A. et al. Law Hum Behav (2006) 30: 603. doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9053-9

Abstract

Research on deception detection in legal contexts has neglected the question of how the use of evidence can affect deception detection accuracy. In this study, police trainees (N=82) either were or were not trained in strategically using the evidence when interviewing lying or truth telling mock suspects (N=82). The trainees’ strategies as well as liars’ and truth tellers’ counter-strategies were analyzed. Trained interviewers applied different strategies than did untrained. As a consequence of this, liars interviewed by trained interviewers were more inconsistent with the evidence compared to liars interviewed by untrained interviewers. Trained interviewers created and utilized the statement-evidence consistency cue, and obtained a considerably higher deception detection accuracy rate (85.4%) than untrained interviewers (56.1%).

Keywords

Deception detection Statement-evidence consistency Evidence disclosure Interviewers’ strategies Suspects’ strategies 

Copyright information

© American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Hartwig
    • 1
  • Pär Anders Granhag
    • 2
  • Leif A. Strömwall
    • 2
  • Ola Kronkvist
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, John Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Göteborg UniversityGöteborgSweden
  3. 3.Växjö UniversityVäxjöSweden

Personalised recommendations