Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 48–53 | Cite as

Language Proficiency and Police Officers’ Lie Detection Performance

  • Amy-May Leach
  • Cayla S. Da Silva


We examined lay persons’ and police officers’ abilities to detect lying in second-language speakers. Participants (N = 121) viewed targets who were lying or telling the truth about an event in either their first or second languages. Overall, participants were better able to detect deception in native-language speakers than second-language speakers. In addition, they tended to believe that native-language speakers were telling the truth. However, contrary to our hypotheses, expertise did not affect lie detection performance. Implications will be discussed.


Lie detection Police officers Bilingualism Signal detection theory 


  1. Bond CF Jr, Atoum AO (2000) International deception. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 26:385–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bond CF Jr, DePaulo BM (2006) Accuracy of deception judgments. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 10:214–234. doi: 10.1207/s115327957pspr1003_2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bond CF Jr, DePaulo BM (2008) Individual differences in detecting deception. Psychol Bull 134:477–492. doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9110-z PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng KH, Broadhurst RG (2005) Detection of deception: the effects of language on detection ability among Hong Kong Chinese. Psychiatr Psychol Law 12:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Da Silva CS, Leach A-M (2012) Detecting deception in second-language speakers. Leg Criminol Psychol. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02030.x
  6. Ekman P (2009) Telling lies. Times Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Ekman P, O’Sullivan M (1991) Who can catch a liar? Am Psychol 46(9):913–920. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.46.9.913 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Global Deception Research Team (2006) A world of lies. J Cross Cult Psychol 37:60–74. doi: 10.1177/0022022105282295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gregersen TS (2005) Nonverbal cues: clues to the detection of foreign language anxiety. Foreign Lang Ann 38:388–400. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02225.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Inbau FE, Reid JE, Buckley JP, Jayne BC (2001) Criminal interrogation and confessions, 4th edn. Aspen, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  11. Kassin SM, Leo RA, Meissner CA, Richman KD, Colwell LH, Leach A-M, La Fon D (2007) Police interviewing and interrogation: a self-report survey of police practices and beliefs. Law Hum Behav 31:381–400. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9073-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Meissner CA, Kassin SM (2002) “He’s guilty!”: Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law Hum Behav 26(5):469–480. doi: 10.1007/s10979-005-2416-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. O’Sullivan M, Frank MG, Hurley CM, Tiwana J (2009) Police lie detection accuracy: the effect of lie scenario. Law Hum Behav 33:530–538. doi: 10.1007/s10979-008-9166-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages (2005) Audit of services to the public at highway border crossings of the Canada Border Services Agency. Author, Ottawa, Ontario CanadaGoogle Scholar
  15. Russano MB, Meissner CA, Narchet FM, Kassin SM (2005). Investigating true and false confession within a novel experimental paradigm. Psychol Sci 16(6):481–486. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01560.x Google Scholar
  16. Saarni C, Salisch MV (1993) The socialization of emotional dissemblance. In: Lewis M, Saarni C (eds) Lying and deception in everyday life. The Guilford Press, New York, pp 106–125Google Scholar
  17. Wixted J, Lee K (n.d.) Signal detection theory [Data file]. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Social Science and HumanitiesUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyOshawaCanada

Personalised recommendations