Advertisement

Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 61–79 | Cite as

Detecting Deception: The Benefit of Looking at a Combination of Behavioral, Auditory and Speech Content Related Cues in a Systematic Manner

  • Aldert Vrij
  • Samantha Mann
Article

Abstract

People communicate with each other across distance in a variety of ways, for example, via the telephone, via electronic forms of communication (the written word) or via videolinks. In this article, behavioral, auditory and speech content related cues which research has shown discriminate (to some extent) between liars and truth tellers will be discussed. Although research has indicated that people are generally poor at detecting deceit, some recent studies suggest that looking at nonverbal, auditory and speech content related responses in an objective and systematic manner will lead to more accurate classifications of liars and truth tellers. These studies will be discussed. Apart from examining the available cues objectively and systematically, lie detection might further improve if the lie detector employs certain communication techniques. In the final part of this article we will discuss some of these techniques.

Keywords

Content Relate Final Part Related Response Electronic Form Communication Technique 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akehurst, L. and A. Vrij. (1999). “Creating Suspects in Police Interviews,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29, 192–210.Google Scholar
  2. Akehurst, L., G. Köhnken, A. Vrij, and R. Bull. (1996). “Lay Persons' and Police Officers' Beliefs Regarding Deceptive Behaviour,” Applied Cognitive Psychology 10, 461–471.Google Scholar
  3. Alonso-Quecuty, M. L. (1992). “Deception Detection and Reality Monitoring: A New Answer to an Old Question?” in F. Lösel, D. Bender, and T. Bliesener (eds.), Psychology and Law: International Perspectives. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, 328–332.Google Scholar
  4. Alonso-Quecuty, M. L. (1996). “Detecting Fact from Fallacy in Child and Adult Witness Accounts,” in G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, M. McMurran, and C. Wilson (eds.), Psychology, Law, and Criminal Justice: International Developments in Research and Practice. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, 74–80.Google Scholar
  5. Alonso-Quecuty, M. L., E. Hernandez-Fernaud, and L. Campos. (1997). “Child Witnesses: Lying About Something Heard,” in S. Redondo, V. Garrido, J. Perez, and R. Barbaret (eds.), Advances in Psychology and Law. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, 129–135.Google Scholar
  6. Baskett, G. D. and R. O. Freedle. (1974). “Aspects of Language Pragmatics and the Social Perception of Lying,” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 3, 117–131.Google Scholar
  7. Bond, C. F. and W. E. Fahey. (1987). “False Suspicion and the Misperception of Deceit,” British Journal of Social Psychology 26, 41–46.Google Scholar
  8. Bond, C. F., A. Omar, U. Pitre, B. R. Lashley, L. M. Skaggs, and C. T. Kirk. (1992). “Fishy-Looking Liars: Deception Judgment from Expectancy Violation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63, 969–977.Google Scholar
  9. Brandt, D. R., G. R. Miller, and J. E. Hocking. (1980a). “The Truth-Deception Attribution: Effects of Familiarity on the Ability of Observers to Detect Deception,” Human Communication Research 6, 99–110.Google Scholar
  10. Brandt, D. R., G. R. Miller, and J. E. Hocking. (1980b). “Effects of Self-Monitoring and Familiarity on Deception Detection,” Communication Quarterly 28, 3–10.Google Scholar
  11. Bull, R. (1998). “Obtaining Information From Child Witnesses,” in A. Memon, A. Vrij, and R. Bull (eds.), Psychology and Law: Truthfulness, Accuracy and Credibility. Maidenhead, England: McGraw-Hill, 188–210.Google Scholar
  12. Buller, D. B. and J. K. Burgoon. (1996). “Interpersonal Deception Theory,” Communication Theory 6, 203–242.Google Scholar
  13. Buller, D. B., J. B. Stiff, and J. K. Burgoon. (1996). “Behavioral Adaptation in Deceptive Transactions: Fact or Fiction: Reply to Levine and McCornack.” Human Communication Research 22, 589–603.Google Scholar
  14. Burgoon, J. K. and D. B. Buller. (1994). “Interpersonal Deception: III. Effects of Deceit on Perceived Communication and Nonverbal Behavior Dynamics,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 18, 155–184.Google Scholar
  15. Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, and L. K. Guerrero. (1995). “Interpersonal Deception IX: Effects of Social Skill and Nonverbal Communication on Deception Success and Detection Accuracy,” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 14, 289–311.Google Scholar
  16. Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, L. Dillman, and J. B. Walther. (1995). “Interpersonal Deception IV: Effects of Suspicion on Perceived Communication and Nonverbal Behavior Dynamics,” Human Communication Research 22, 163–196.Google Scholar
  17. Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, A. S. Ebesu, C. H. White, and P. A. Rockwell. (1996). “Testing Interpersonal Deception Theory: Effects of Suspicion on Communication Behaviors and Perception,” Communication Theory 6, 243–267.Google Scholar
  18. Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, K. Floyd, and J. Grandpre. (1996). “Deceptive Realities: Sender, Receiver, and Observer Perspectives in Deceptive Conversations,” Communication Research 23, 724–748.Google Scholar
  19. Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, C. H. White, W. Afifi, and A. L. S. Buslig. (1999). “The Role of Conversation Involvement in Deceptive Interpersonal Interactions,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25, 669–685.Google Scholar
  20. Chartrand, T. L. and J. A. Bargh. (1999). “The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76, 893–910.Google Scholar
  21. Davis, M. and D. Hadiks. (1995). “Demeanor and Credibility,” Semiotica 106, 5–54.Google Scholar
  22. DePaulo, B. M. (1994). “Spotting Lies: Can Humans Learn to do Better?” Current Directions in Psychological Science 3, 83–86.Google Scholar
  23. DePaulo, B. M. and S. E. Kirkendol. (1989). “The Motivational Impairment Effect in the Communication of Deception,” in J. C. Yuille (ed.), Credibility Assessment. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer, 51–70.Google Scholar
  24. DePaulo, B. M. and H. S. Friedman. (1998). “Nonverbal Communication,” in D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 3–40.Google Scholar
  25. DePaulo, B. M., D. E. Anderson, and H. Cooper. (1999, October). Explicit and Implicit Deception Detection. Paper presented at the Society of Experimental Social Psychologists, St. Louis.Google Scholar
  26. DePaulo, B. M., J. J. Lindsay, B. E. Malone, L. Muhlenbruck, K. Charlton, and H. Cooper. (2003). “Cues to Deception,” Psychological Bulletin 129, 74–118.Google Scholar
  27. DePaulo, B. M., J. L. Stone, and G. D. Lassiter. (1985). “Deceiving and Detecting Deceit,” in B. R. Schenkler (ed.), The Self and Social Life, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 323–370.Google Scholar
  28. Ekman, P. (1985/2001). Telling Lies. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  29. Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen. (1972). “Hand Movements,” Journal of Communication 22, 353–374.Google Scholar
  30. Ekman, P. and M. G. Frank. (1993). “Lies that Fail,” in M. Lewis and C. Saarni (eds.), Lying and Deception in Everyday Life. New York, NY: Guildford Press, 184–201.Google Scholar
  31. Ekman, P. and W. V. Friesen. (1974). “Detecting Deception from the Body or Face,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 29, 288–298.Google Scholar
  32. Ekman, P., W. V. Friesen, and K. R. Scherer. (1976). “Body Movement and Voice Pitch in Deceptive Interaction,” Semiotica 16, 23–27.Google Scholar
  33. Feeley, T. H., M. A. deTurck, and M. J. Young. (1995). “Baseline Familiarity in Lie Detection,” Communication Research Reports 12, 160–169.Google Scholar
  34. Gordon, N. J. and W. L. Fleisher. (2002). Effective Interviewing and Interrogation Techniques. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Gudjonsson, G. H. (1992). The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions and Testimony. Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  36. Harrigan, J. A. and D. M. O'Connell. (1996). “Facial Movements During Anxiety States,” Personality and Individual Differences 21, 205–212.Google Scholar
  37. Hess, J. E. (1997). Interviewing and Interrogation for Law Enforcement. Reading, United Kingdom: Anderson Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  38. Hocking, J. E. and D. G. Leathers. (1980). “Nonverbal Indicators of Deception: A New Theoretical Perspective,” Communication Monographs 47, 119–131.Google Scholar
  39. Höfer, E., L. Akehurst, and G. Metzger. (1996, August). Reality Monitoring: A Chance for Further Development of CBCA? Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the European Association on Psychology and Law in Sienna, Italy.Google Scholar
  40. Inbau, F. E., J. E. Reid, and J. P. Buckley. (1986). Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 3rd Ed. Baltimore, Md.: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  41. Inbau, F. E., J. E. Reid, J. P. Buckley, and B. C. Jayne. (2001). Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 4th Ed. Gaithersburg, Maryland: Aspen Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Johnson, M. K. and C. L. Raye. (1981). “Reality Monitoring,” Psychological Review, 88, 67–85.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson, M. K. and C. L. Raye, C. L. (1998). “False Memories and Confabulation,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2, 137–145.Google Scholar
  44. Johnson, M. K., S. Hashtroudi, and D. S. Lindsay. (1993). “Source Monitoring,” Psychological Bulletin 114, 3–29.Google Scholar
  45. Köhnken, G. (1999, July). Statement Validity Assessment. Paper presented at the pre-conference programme of applied courses 'Assessing credibility' organised by the European Association of Psychology and Law, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
  46. Köhnken, G., E. Schimossek, E. Aschermann, and E. Höfer. (1995). “The Cognitive Interview and the Assessment of the Credibility of Adult's Statements,” Journal of Applied Psychology 80, 671–684.Google Scholar
  47. Krauss, R. M. (1981). “Impression Formation, Impression Management, and Nonverbal Behaviors,” in E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (eds.), Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium, vol 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 323–341.Google Scholar
  48. Kraut, R. E. (1980). “Humans as Lie Detectors: Some Second Thoughts,” Journal of Communication 30, 209–216.Google Scholar
  49. Lamb, M. E., K. J. Sternberg, P. W. Esplin, I. Hershkowitz, and Y. Orbach. (1997). “Assessing the Credibility of Children's Allegations of Sexual Abuse: A Survey of Recent Research,” Learning and Individual Differences 9, 175–194.Google Scholar
  50. Mann, S. (2001). Suspects, Lies and Videotape: An Investigation into Telling and Detecting Lies in Police/Suspect Interviews. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Portsmouth (United Kingdom), Psychology Department.Google Scholar
  51. Mann, S., A. Vrij, and R. Bull. (in press). “Detecting True Lie: Police Officers' Ability to Detect Suspects' Lies,” Journal of Applied Psychology.Google Scholar
  52. Mann, S., A. Vrij, and R. Bull. (2002). “Suspect, Lies and Videotapes: An Analysis of Authentic High-Stake Liars,” Law and Human Behavior 26, 365–376.Google Scholar
  53. Manzanero, A. L. and M. Diges. (1996). “Effects of Preparation on Internal and External Memories,” in G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, M. McMurran, and C. Wilson (eds.), Psychology, Law, and Criminal Justice: International Developments in Research and Practice. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, 56–63.Google Scholar
  54. Miller, G. R. and J. B. Stiff. (1993). Deceptive Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Moston, S. J. and T. Engelberg. (1993). “Police Questioning Techniques in Tape Recorded Interviews with Criminal Suspects,” Policing and Society 3, 223–237.Google Scholar
  56. Moston, S. J., G. M. Stephenson, and T. M. Williamson. (1992). “The Effects of Case Characteristics on Suspect Behaviour During Police Questioning,” British Journal of Criminology 32, 23–39.Google Scholar
  57. Ofshe, R. J. and R. A. Leo. (1997). “The Decision to Confess Falsely: Rational Choice and Irrational Action,” Denver University Law Review 74, 979–1112.Google Scholar
  58. Raskin, D. C. and P. W. Esplin. (1991). “Statement Validity Assessment: Interview Procedures and Content Analysis of Children's Statements of Sexual Abuse,” Behavioral Assessment 13, 265–291.Google Scholar
  59. Roberts, K. P., M. E. Lamb, J. L. Zale, and D. W. Randall. (1998). Qualitative Differences in Children's Accounts of Confirmed and Unconfirmed Incidents of Sexual Abuse. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Redondo Beach, March 5-7.Google Scholar
  60. Seager, P. (2001). Improving the Ability of Individuals to Detect Lies. Unpublished PhD-thesis. University of Hertfordshire (United Kingdom), Psychology Department.Google Scholar
  61. 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.Google Scholar
  62. Steller, M. (1989). “Recent Developments in Statement Analysis,” in J. C. Yuille (ed.), Credibility Assessment. Deventer, the Netherlands: Kluwer, 135–154.Google Scholar
  63. Steller, M. and G. Köhnken. (1989). “Criteria-Based Content Analysis,” in D. C. Raskin (ed.), Psychological Methods in Criminal Investigation and Evidence. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 217–245.Google Scholar
  64. Tecce, J. J. (1992). “Psychology, Physiology and Experimental,” in McGraw-Hill Yearbook of Science and Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 375–377.Google Scholar
  65. Undeutsch, U. (1967). “Beurteilung der Glaubhaftigkeit von Aussagen,” in U. Undeutsch (ed.), Handbuch der Psychologie Vol. 11: Forensische Psychologie. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe, 26–181.Google Scholar
  66. Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting Lies and Deceit: The Psychology of Lying and the Implications for Professional Practice. Chichester: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  67. Vrij, A. (2001). “Implicit Lie Detection,” The Psychologist 14, 58–60.Google Scholar
  68. Vrij, A. and G. R. Semin. (1996). “Lie Experts' Beliefs About Nonverbal Indicators of Deception,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 20, 65–80.Google Scholar
  69. Vrij, A. and S. Heaven. (1999). “Vocal and Verbal Indicators of Deception as a Function of Lie Complexity,” Psychology, Crime, & Law 4, 401–413.Google Scholar
  70. Vrij, A. and S. Mann. (2001). “Telling and Detecting Lies in a High-Stake Situation: The Case of a Convicted Murderer,” Applied Cognitive Psychology 15, 187–203.Google Scholar
  71. Vrij, A. and S. Mann. (2003). “Deceptive Responses and Detecting Deceit,” in P. W. Halligan, C. Bass, and D. Oakley (eds.), Malingering and Illness Deception: Clinical and Theoretical Perspectives. Oxford: University Press, 67–88.Google Scholar
  72. Vrij, A., K. Edward, and R. Bull. (2001a). “People's Insight into their Own Behaviour and Speech Content While Lying,” British Journal of Psychology 92, 373–389.Google Scholar
  73. Vrij, A., K. Edward, and R. Bull. (2001b). “Police Officers' Ability to Detect Deceit: The Benefit of Indirect Deception Measures,” Legal and Criminological Psychology 6, 185–196.Google Scholar
  74. Vrij, A., K. Edward, and R. Bull. (2001c). “Stereotypical Verbal and Nonverbal Responses While Deceiving Others,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27, 899–909.Google Scholar
  75. Vrij, A., K. Edward, K. P. Roberts, and R. Bull. (2000). “Detecting Deceit Via Analysis of Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 24 (4), 239–263.Google Scholar
  76. Vrij, A., L. Akehurst, S. Soukara, and R. Bull. (in press). “Detecting Deceit Via Analyses of Verbal and Nonverbal Behaviour in Adults and Children,” Human Communication Research.Google Scholar
  77. Vrij, J. (2001). “Verzet tegen angst,” Kontakt door Aantreden 56 (5), 4.Google Scholar
  78. Wallbott, H. G. and K. R. Scherer. (1991). “Stress Specificities: Differential Effects of Coping Style, Gender, and Type of Stressor on Automatic Arousal, Facial Expression, and Subjective Feeling,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61, 147–156.Google Scholar
  79. White, C. H. and J. K. Burgoon. (2001). “Adaptation and Communicative Design: Patterns of Interaction in Truthful and Deceptive Conversations,” Human Communication Research 27, 9–37.Google Scholar
  80. Wiseman, R. (1995). “The Megalab Truth Test,” Nature 373, 391.Google Scholar
  81. Zuckerman, M., B. M. DePaulo, and R. Rosenthal. (1981). “Verbal and Nonverbal Communication of Deception,” in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 14. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1–57.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aldert Vrij
    • 1
  • Samantha Mann
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK

Personalised recommendations