Skip to main content

Thermal Imaging as a Lie Detection Tool at Airports

Law and Human Behavior volume 35, pages 40–48 (2011)Cite this article

Abstract

We tested the accuracy of thermal imaging as a lie detection tool in airport screening. Fifty-one passengers in an international airport departure hall told the truth or lied about their forthcoming trip in an interview. Their skin temperature was recorded via a thermal imaging camera. Liars’ skin temperature rose significantly during the interview, whereas truth tellers’ skin temperature remained constant. On the basis of these different patterns, 64% of truth tellers and 69% of liars were classified correctly. The interviewers made veracity judgements independently from the thermal recordings. The interviewers outperformed the thermal recordings and classified 72% of truth tellers and 77% of liars correctly. Accuracy rates based on the combination of thermal imaging scores and interviewers’ judgements were the same as accuracy rates based on interviewers’ judgements alone. Implications of the findings for the suitability of thermal imaging as a lie detection tool in airports are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. Passengers who did not take part gave good reasons to do so: They were busy (had work or shopping to do), travelled with more people or had to catch their flight. The reasonably high response rate may have been a combination of an official looking experimenter combined with the opportunity to earn money and serving a good cause (scientific research that could be used to enhance security at airports).

  2. These questions were asked to establish the ground truth in the experiment. All participants (truth tellers and liars) were asked to reveal their true destination during the actual interview, and truth tellers were also asked to reveal the true purpose of their trip. When we compared the answers during the actual interview with the answers given to the experimenter, we noticed that all interviewees honestly reported their destination, and that all truth tellers honestly reported the true purpose of their trip.

  3. A logistic regression analysis revealed similar results. That is, the results for baseline and Phase 1 were not significant, but the results for Phases 2 and 3 were significant. When we entered Phase 3 and the interviewers’ veracity judgement in the regression analysis, the interviewers’ judgement variable emerged as the only predictor.

References

  • Bond, C. F., & De Paulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgements. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L. M., Charlton, K. C., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Granhag, P. A., & Knieps, M. (in press). Episodic future thought: Illuminating the trademarks of true and false intent. Applied Cognitive Psychology.

  • Köhnken, G. (2002). A German perspective on children’s testimony. In H. L. Westcott, G. M. Davies, & R. H. C. Bull (Eds.), Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (pp. 233–244). Chichester: Wiley.

    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: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh, D. N., Zajonc, R. B., Vig, P. S., & Emerick, S. W. (1997). Facial movement, breathing, temperature, and affect: Implications of the vascular theory of emotional efference. Cognition and Emotion, 11, 171–195. doi:10.1080/026999397379980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merla, A., & Romani, G. L. (2007). Thermal signatures of emotional arousal: A functional infrared imaging study. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international conference of the IEEEE EMBS (pp. 247–249).

  • National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Committee to review the scientific evidence on the polygraph. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavlidis, J., Eberhardt, N. L., & Levine, J. A. (2002). Seeing through the face of deception. Nature, 415, 35. doi:10.1038/415035a.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlidis, I., Levine, J., & Baukol, P. (2001). Thermal image analysis for anxiety detection. Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing, 2, 315–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M., & Harris, G. T. (2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC area, Cohen’s d, and r. Law & Human Behavior, 29(5), 615–620. doi:10.1007/s10979-005-6832-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (in press). Lying about flying: The first experiment to detect false intent. Psychology, Crime, & Law.

  • 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. doi:10.1007/s10979-008-9143-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., & Granhag, P. A. (in press). A comparison between lying about intentions and past activities: Verbal cues and detection accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology.

  • Vrij, A., Mann, S., Fisher, R., Leal, S., Milne, B., & Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 253–265. doi:10.1007/s10979-007-9103-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Department, University of Portsmouth, King Henry Building, King Henry 1 Street, Portsmouth, PO1 2DY, UK

    Lara Warmelink, Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal & Dave Forrester

  2. Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

    Ronald P. Fisher

Authors
  1. Aldert Vrij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha Mann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sharon Leal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dave Forrester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ronald P. Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lara Warmelink.

About this article

Cite this article

Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S. et al. Thermal Imaging as a Lie Detection Tool at Airports. Law Hum Behav 35, 40–48 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-010-9251-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-010-9251-3

Keywords

  • Deception
  • Thermal imaging
  • Interviewing