Modeling and simulation credibility assessments of whole-body finite element computational models for use in NASA extravehicular activity applications

Computational finite element (FE) models are used in suited astronaut injury risk assessments; however, these models' verification, validation, and credibility (VV&C) procedures for simulating injuries in altered gravity environments are limited. Our study conducts VV&C assessments of THUMS and Elemance whole-body FE models for predicting suited astronaut injury biomechanics using eight credibility factors, as per NASA-STD-7009A. Credibility factor ordinal scores are assigned by reviewing existing documentation describing VV&C practices, and credibility sufficiency thresholds are assigned based on input from subject matter experts. Our results show the FE models are credible for suited astronaut injury investigation in specific ranges of kinematic and kinetic conditions correlating to highway and contact sports events. Nevertheless, these models are deficient when applied outside these ranges. Several credibility elevation strategies are prescribed to improve models' credibility for the NASA-centric application domain.

The effect of credibility assessment techniques on consistency and subsequent memory for the truth

Repeated interviews are common during an investigation, and perceived consistency between multiple statements is associated with an interviewee's credibility. Furthermore, research has shown that the act of lying can affect a person's memory for what truthfully occurred. The current study assessed the influence of lying on memory during initial and repeated interviews, as well as how an interviewer's approach might affect between-statement consistency for true and false statements. Participants performed a scavenger hunt at two sets of buildings on a university campus and then were either dismissed or interviewed (with a Reverse Order instruction or a Structured Interview) about their activities. Participants chose one set to tell the truth about and then created a lie about activities in another area of campus that had not been visited. One week later, all participants provided a second free recall statement about their activities during the scavenger hunt, and then a final truthful description of both areas that were visited during the scavenger hunt. Truthfully rehearsed experiences were associated with more accurate recall of information learned during the scavenger hunt as well as more consistent and more detailed statements. The Structured Interview led to initially more detailed statements, but more inconsistencies in the form of omissions.

An extension MID credibility item addressing construct proximity is a reliable alternative to correlation item

OBJECTIVE

To extend the anchor-based minimal important differences (MIDs) credibility instrument by adding an item addressing construct proximity as the alternative to the correlation item.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

The credibility instrument includes one core items addressing the correlation between the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and the anchor. However, the majority of MID studies in the literature fail to report the correlation. As an alternative item, we added a subjective assessment of similarity of the constructs (i.e., construct proximity) between the PROM and anchor and generated principles for the assessment. We sampled 101 MIDs and analyzed the assessments performed by each pair of raters. By calculating weighted Cohen's kappa, we assessed the reliability of the assessments.

RESULTS

Construct proximity assessment is based on the anticipated association between the anchor and PROM constructs: the closer the anticipated association, the higher the rating. Our detailed principles address the most frequently used anchors: transition ratings, measures of satisfaction, other PROMs, and clinical measures. The assessments showed acceptable agreement (weighted kappa 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.94) between raters.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of a reported correlation coefficient, construct proximity assessment provides a useful alternative in the credibility assessment of anchor-based MID estimates.

The perceived credibility of repeated-event witnesses depends upon their veracity

For repeated crimes like domestic violence and workplace bullying, the primary evidence is often the alleged victim's testimony. Consequently, the perceived credibility of repeated event speakers can be pivotal to legal proceedings. In order to investigate perceptions of truthful and deceptive repeated-event speakers, undergraduate students observed interviews of speakers describing a single occurrence of an event that was either experienced or fabricated either once or multiple times. Some participants additionally read an expert statement on repeated-event memory. The effect of repetition on perceived credibility depended on the speaker's veracity, enhancing the credibility of fabricators but diminishing the credibility of truth-tellers. The expert testimony was found to raise the perceived honesty and cognitive competence of the repeated-event speakers and thus could be a promising mechanism for enhancing perceived credibility in legal proceedings.

Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias

Research has shown that judges and jurors are influenced by suspect ethnicity and that they might discriminate against out-group suspects in making decisions. This study examined the tendency to favor in-group members, as predicted by social identity theory, in assessing alibi credibility. Forty Israeli-Jewish and 40 Israeli-Arab participants assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by a suspect who was either Israeli-Jewish or Israeli-Arab. Findings show that participants were more likely to believe the alibi when it was provided by an in-group suspect than by an out-group suspect, supporting intergroup bias in alibi credibility assessments. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Assessment of Testifying Ability in Preschool Children: CAPALIST

Purpose: Interviews to obtain statements in judicial procedures need to be adapted to the witnesses' abilities to testify. Moreover, knowing the cognitive abilities involved in testifying provides relevant criteria to assess statement credibility. As age or intelligence quotient is not enough to estimate these capabilities, an instrument to evaluate witnesses' specific abilities to testify is needed. The present paper validates CAPALIST, a procedure that considers relevant capabilities when assessing the testimony given by children. Methods: This study analyzed, by means of an invariant measurement approach (Rasch model), four scales included in CAPALIST: language, memory, contextual information, and social thinking. In addition, gender and age differences were analyzed in 83 children [45 males and 38 females; M _age = 4.3 years, SD = 0.74, range (3.06-5.11)] from three courses in early childhood education. Results: The four scales do not severely violate the requirements of the model. The principal component analysis of the residuals indicates that the four scales are one dimensional and that the assumption of local independence was not violated. Differential item functioning of the scales associated with gender was not detected. A significant effect of the school year was obtained, with an increase in ability in successive courses. The percentage of children who presented severe misfit responses with the model was low. In addition, the number of items with a severe misfit was also low. Conclusion: An acceptable performance of CAPALIST is demonstrated for most of the scales, although items with a severe misfit must be replaced, and more difficult items have to be included in some scales of the revised version of the instrument. CAPALIST is a promising procedure to assess the abilities of children to testify in order to adapt interviews and to evaluate their statements correctly.

Aloe vera and health outcomes: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

This umbrella review aims to summarize the effects of Aloe vera on health outcomes and assess the strength of evidence. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, CINAHL, and AMED were searched from inception to October, 2019 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials that investigated the effects of Aloe vera on health outcomes. Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed the methodological quality, and rated the credibility of evidence according to established criteria. Ten articles reporting 71 unique outcomes of Aloe vera were included. Of these, 47 (67%) were nominally statistically significant based on random-effects model (p ≤ .05). Only 3 outcomes were supported by highly suggestive evidence, whereas 42 outcomes were supported by weak evidence. The highly suggestive evidence supported benefits of Aloe vera in the prevention of second-degree infusion phlebitis (RR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10-0.32, p-value: 1.75 × 10^-9 ) and chemotherapy-induced phlebitis based on overall incidence (OR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.20, p-value: 9.68 × 10^-20 ) and incidence of the second degree of severity (OR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07-0.14, p-value: 3.41 × 10^-35 ). However, the majority of the evidence were limited by small sample size and poor methodological quality. Therefore, despite the overall favorable effect of Aloe vera, more robust studies are needed.

Police accuracy in truth/lie detection when judging baseline interviews

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.

The independent reinforcement effect: The role diverse social ties play in the credibility assessment process

In this study, we explore the effect of diversity among people who share a story about a scientific discovery, on the recipient's credibility assessment regarding that story. The data used in this study were gathered in two phases. Initial data were collected through the Twitter application program interface. The data were then used in an experimental setting: We manipulated the level of diversity of real-life Twitter followings, supposedly retweeting a story to our participants ( n = 274). Each of our participants was then asked to complete a paper-based survey. Our findings show that social diversity can enhance the perceived credibility of a shared item. This effect is amplified among individuals with high digital literacy, as well as individuals with high need for cognition. The study offers a deeper understanding of credibility assessment mechanisms within Twitter and other social networking sites.

Automated verbal credibility assessment of intentions: The model statement technique and predictive modeling

Recently, verbal credibility assessment has been extended to the detection of deceptive intentions, the use of a model statement, and predictive modeling. The current investigation combines these 3 elements to detect deceptive intentions on a large scale. Participants read a model statement and wrote a truthful or deceptive statement about their planned weekend activities (Experiment 1). With the use of linguistic features for machine learning, more than 80% of the participants were classified correctly. Exploratory analyses suggested that liars included more person and location references than truth‐tellers. Experiment 2 examined whether these findings replicated on independent‐sample data. The classification accuracies remained well above chance level but dropped to 63%. Experiment 2 corroborated the finding that liars' statements are richer in location and person references than truth‐tellers' statements. Together, these findings suggest that liars may over‐prepare their statements. Predictive modeling shows promise as an automated veracity assessment approach but needs validation on independent data.

When Is a Child's Forensic Statement Deemed Credible? A Comparison of Physical and Sexual Abuse Cases

A large national sample of 4,775 reports of child physical and sexual abuse made in Israel in 2014 was analyzed in order to examine whether assessments of credibility would vary according to abuse type, physical or sexual, and whether child and event characteristics contributing to the probability that reports of abuse would be determined as credible would be similar or different in child physical abuse (CPA) and child sexual abuse (CSA) cases. Results revealed that CPA reports were less likely to be viewed as credible (41.9%) compared to CSA reports (56.7%). Multigroup path analysis, however, indicated equivalence in predicting factors. In a unified model for both types of abuse, salient predictors of a credible judgment were older age, lack of a cognitive delay, and the alleged abusive event being a onetime less severe act. Over and beyond the effects of these factors, abuse type significantly contributed to the prediction of credibility judgments.

Establishing Origin: Analysing the Questions Asked in Asylum Interviews

In the absence of evidence, asylum seekers are interviewed to assess the credibility of their stories. Few studies have examined whether or not the questions asked in such interviews stimulate the applicant to give lengthy, detailed, and accurate answers. The style, type, and content of the questions asked in order to assess a claim about origin were analysed in 40 case files from the Dutch Immigration Service. A large proportion of the questions were closed and fact-checking questions. Less than one fifth of questions were open or cued recall questions. The results show that to assess credibility of origin, knowledge questions were posed about the immediate living environment, flight to Europe, identity documents, country of origin, and personal background of applicants. Possibilities for increasing the quantity and quality of information obtained in asylum interviews are discussed. Future research should validate the assumption that truthful claimants have substantial knowledge about their country and town of origin.

To Veil or Not to Veil: Detecting Lies in The Courtroom. A Comment on Leach et al. (2016)

For the past 40 years, lie detection has predominantly been studied in the context of police-suspect and investigative interviews. In their paper, Leach et al. (2016) examined whether niqabs or hijabs interfere with the trial judges' ability to detect deception and concluded that veiling enhanced trial judges' ability to make accurate veracity judgments. In this comment, we argue that the conclusions made by Leach et al. are based upon an inaccurate experimental court paradigm and suffer from methodological and analytical issues. It is our opinion that the applicability of their research findings to real-life court proceedings alongside potential changes to court practices and policies based on Leach et al. should be regarded as naïve and misinformed.

Detecting false intent using eye blink measures

Eye blink measures have been shown to be diagnostic in detecting deception regarding past acts. Here we examined—across two experiments with increasing degrees of ecological validity—whether changes in eye blinking can be used to determine false intent regarding future actions. In both experiments, half of the participants engaged in a mock crime and then transported an explosive device with the intent of delivering it to a “contact” that would use it to cause a disturbance. Eye blinking was measured for all participants when presented with three types of questions: relevant to intent to transport an explosive device, relevant to intent to engage in an unrelated illegal act, and neutral questions. Experiment 1 involved standing participants watching a video interviewer with audio presented ambiently. Experiment 2 involved standing participants questioned by a live interviewer. Across both experiments, changes in blink count during and immediately following individual questions, total number of blinks, and maximum blink time length differentiated those with false intent from truthful intent participants. In response to questions relevant to intent to deliver an explosive device vs. questions relevant to intent to deliver illegal drugs, those with false intent showed a suppression of blinking during the questions when compared to the 10 s period after the end of the questions, a lower number of blinks, and shorter maximum blink duration. The results are discussed in relation to detecting deception about past activities as well as to the similarities and differences to detecting false intent as described by prospective memory and arousal.