Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit

Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future

This article provides an overview of verbal lie detection research. This type of research began in the 1970s with examining the relationship between deception and specific words. We briefly review this initial research. In the late 1980s, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) emerged, a veracity assessment tool containing a list of verbal criteria. This was followed by Reality Monitoring (RM) and Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), two other veracity assessment tools that contain lists of verbal criteria. We discuss their contents, theoretical rationales, and ability to identify truths and lies. We also discuss similarities and differences between CBCA, RM, and SCAN. In the mid 2000s, 'Interviewing to deception' emerged, with the goal of developing specific interview protocols aimed at enhancing or eliciting verbal veracity cues. We outline the four most widely researched interview protocols to date: the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), Verifiability Approach (VA), Cognitive Credibility Assessment (CCA), and Reality Interviewing (RI). We briefly discuss the working of these protocols, their theoretical rationales and empirical support, as well as the similarities and differences between them. We conclude this article with elaborating on how neuroscientists can inform and improve verbal lie detection.

The Model Sketch for Enhancing Lie Detection and Eliciting Information

BACKGROUND

Sketching while narrating is an effective interview technique for eliciting information and cues to deceit. The current research examined the effects of introducing a Model Sketch in investigative interviews andis pre-registered on https://osf.io/kz9mc (accessed on 18 January 2022).

METHODS

Participants (N = 163) completed a mock mission and were asked to tell the truth or to lie about it in an interview. In Phase 1 of the interview, participants provided either a free recall (control condition), sketched and narrated with exposure to a Model Sketch (Model Sketch-present condition), or sketched and narrated without exposure to a Model Sketch (Model Sketch-absent condition). In Phase 2, all participants provided a free recall without sketching.

RESULTS

Truth tellers reported significantly more information than lie tellers. The Model Sketch elicited more location details than a Free recall in Phase 1 and more veracity differences than the other Modality conditions in Phase 2.

CONCLUSION

The Model Sketch seems to enhance the elicitation of information and to have carryover veracity effects in a follow-up free recall.

Police Officers' Interrogation Expertise and Major Objectives in Police Service and Training: A Comprehensive Overview of the Literature

Interrogation is a core task of practical police work. The outcomes of interrogation often provide crucial evidence for solving criminal cases. The success of interrogation depends on interactions between police officers and citizens. Based on a comprehensive literature overview, we propose a three-factor typology for interrogations by police officers. First, the competencies of police officers refer to the application of personal, professional, social, and methodological capabilities. The underlying concept of interrogation refers to the application of both explicit and implicit experience-based interrogation models. Communication refers to the goal-directed application of communication tactics and techniques. According to this typology, we discuss the major objectives of police interrogation in police service and training from police officers' perspectives. The present study provides guidance for practical police services and training by offering an evidence-based interrogation standard.

The effects of sketching while narrating on information elicitation and deception detection in multiple interviews

Sketching while narrating is effective for eliciting information and veracity cues in single interviews. In the current research, we tested this technique in multiple interviews. Participants were interviewed three times over three weeks about a genuine (truth tellers) or a fabricated (lie tellers) memorable event. They sketched while narrating in Week 1, Week 2, Weeks 1 and 2, or not at all (verbal statement only). Statements were coded for total, core, peripheral, and common knowledge details, self-handicapping strategies, complications, plausibility, and proportions of complications and core details. In the third interview and across interviews, the Sketch instruction resulted in a higher proportion of core details. Truth tellers reported more total and core details and complications and fewer common knowledge details and exhibited a higher proportion of complications than lie tellers. Truth tellers' stories also sounded more plausible than lie tellers' stories. The interaction effects were not significant. Thus, sketching while narrating seemed to have a similar effect on truth tellers and lie tellers in the current study.

'Please tell me all you remember': a comparison between British and Arab interviewees' free narrative performance and its implications for lie detection

We examined how much information British and Arab truth tellers and lie tellers volunteer in an initial free narrative. Based on cultural differences in communication styles we predicted that British interviewees would report more details and more complications than Arab interviewees (culture main effect). We further predicted that truth tellers would report more details and complications than lie tellers (veracity main effect), particularly in the British sample (Veracity × Culture interaction effect). A total of 78 British and 76 Israeli-Arab participants took part. The experiment was carried out at a British university and an Israeli university. Participants carried out a mission. Truth tellers were instructed to report the mission truthfully in a subsequent interview whereas lie tellers were asked to lie about certain aspects of the mission. The three hypotheses were supported for details, whereas for complications only the predicted veracity main effect occurred.