Police accuracy in truth/lie detection when judging baseline interviews.

baseline interviewing comparable truth baseline credibility assessment deception detection interrogation interviewing techniques police officers’ accuracy

Journal

Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
ISSN: 1321-8719
Titre abrégé: Psychiatr Psychol Law
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9433511

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
entrez: 5 3 2020
pubmed: 5 3 2020
medline: 5 3 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Research has shown that a comparable truth baseline (CTB) approach elicits more cues to deception and results in higher accuracy rates than a small talk baseline. Past research focused on laypeople's accuracy rates. We examined whether the CTB also has a positive effect on law enforcement personnel accuracy. In this study, 95 police officers judged 10 interviews, whereby half of the senders told the truth, and the other half lied about a mock undercover mission. Half of the interviews included only questioning about the event under investigation, whereas the other half also included questioning aimed at creating a CTB. Total and truth accuracy did not differ, but observers who watched interviews with a CTB obtained higher lie detection accuracy rates than those who watched interviews without the baseline questioning. Signal detection analyses showed that this effect could be attributed to a decreased response bias in the CTB condition.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32128012
doi: 10.1080/13218719.2019.1642258
pii: 1642258
pmc: PMC7033705
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

841-850

Informations de copyright

© 2019 The Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.

Références

Span J Psychol. 2018 Nov 13;21:E49
pubmed: 30419998
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006;10(3):214-34
pubmed: 16859438
Annu Rev Psychol. 2019 Jan 4;70:295-317
pubmed: 30609913
Psychol Bull. 2003 Jan;129(1):74-118
pubmed: 12555795
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999 Feb;31(1):137-49
pubmed: 10495845
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Feb 6;26(4):571-579
pubmed: 31984097
Front Psychol. 2017 Jul 17;8:1154
pubmed: 28769829

Auteurs

Letizia Caso (L)

Department of Human and Social Sciences, University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.

Nicola Palena (N)

Department of Human and Social Sciences, University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.

Elga Carlessi (E)

Department of Human and Social Sciences, University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.
Bergamo Local Polics, Bergamo, Italy.

Aldert Vrij (A)

Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.

Classifications MeSH