CREST Outputs

Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit

In none of the deception studies that used drawings to date, was the effect of sketching on both speech content and drawing content examined, making it unclear what the full potential is of the use of drawings as a lie detection tool. A total of 122 truth tellers and liars took part in the study who did or did not sketch while narrating their allegedly experienced event. We formulated hypotheses about the total amount of information and number of complications reported and about various features of the drawings. Participants in the Sketch‐present condition provided more information than participants in the Sketch‐absent condition, and truth tellers reported more details than liars, but only in the Sketch‐present condition. In contrast to previous research, no Veracity differences occurred regarding the content of the drawings, perhaps because sketching was introduced as a tool that facilitated verbal recall and not as a stand‐alone tool.

(From the journal abstract)


Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. Fisher & Haneen Deeb, 2020. Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit. Applied Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3646

Authors: Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. Fisher, Haneen Deeb
Verbal cues to deceit when lying through omitting information

Background

Lying through omitting information has been neglected in verbal lie detection research. The task is challenging: Can we decipher from the truthful information a lie teller provides that s/he is hiding something? We expected this to be the case because of lie tellers’ inclination to keep their stories simple. We predicted lie tellers to provide fewer details and fewer complications than truth tellers, the latter particularly after exposure to a Model Statement.

Method

A total of 44 truth tellers and 41 lie tellers were interviewed about a conversation (debriefing interview) they had taken part in earlier. Lie tellers were asked not to discuss one aspect of that debriefing interview.

Results

Results showed that truth tellers reported more complications than lie tellers after exposure to a Model Statement.

Conclusion

Ideas about future research in lying through omissions are discussed.

(From the journal abstract)


Leal, S., Vrij, A., Deeb, H., Hudson, C., Capuozzo, P., & Fisher, R. P. (2020). Verbal cues to deceit when lying through omitting information. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 25(2), 278–294.

Authors: Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Ronald P. Fisher
https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12180
Encouraging interviewees to say more and deception: The ghostwriter method

Background

We examined a new method to encourage interviewees to say more, the ghostwriter method, and examined its effect on eliciting information and cues to deceit.

Method

A total of 150 truth tellers and liars either told the truth about a trip they made in the last 12 months or pretended to have made such a trip. They were allocated to a Control condition, a ‘Be detailed’ condition in which they were encouraged to report even small details and a ghostwriter condition in which they were told to imagine talking to a ghostwriter. The dependent variables were details, complications, common knowledge details, self-handicapping strategies, proportion of complications, plausibility, and verifiable sources.

Results

The ghostwriter condition elicited more details and revealed in plausibility a stronger cue to deceit than the other two conditions.

Conclusion

The ghostwriter method appears to be a promising tool for eliciting information and cues to deceit.

(From the journal abstract)


Leal, S., Vrij, A., Deeb, H., & Kamermans, K. (2019). Encouraging interviewees to say more and deception: The ghostwriter method. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24(2), 273–287

Authors: Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb
https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12152
Plausibility: A Verbal Cue to Veracity worth Examining?

Truth tellers sound more plausible than lie tellers. Plausibility ratings do not require much time or cognitive resources, but a disadvantage is that it is measured subjectively on Likert scales. The aim of the current paper was to understand if plausibility can be predicted by three other verbal veracity cues that can be measured objectively by counting their frequency of occurrence: details, complications, and verifiable sources. If these objective cues could predict plausibility, observers could be instructed to pay attention to them when judging plausibility, which would make plausibility ratings somewhat more objective. We therefore re-analysed five existing datasets; all of them included plausibility, details and complications and two of them also verifiable sources as dependent variables. Plausibility was positively correlated with all three other tested cues, but mostly predicted by complications and verifiable sources, explaining on average almost 40% of the variance. Plausibility showed larger effect sizes in distinguishing truth tellers from lie tellers than the three other cues, perhaps because the plausibility cue consists of multiple components (complications and verifiable sources). Research has shown that the cues that showed the strongest relationship with veracity typically consisted of multiple components.

(From the journal abstract)


Vrij, A., Deeb, H., Leal, S., Granhag, P.-A., & Fisher, R. P. (2021). Plausibility: A Verbal Cue to Veracity worth Examining? The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 13(2), 47–53.

Authors: Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Sharon Leal, Pär-Anders Granhag, Ronald P. Fisher
https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2021a4
Lying through omitting information: examining the effect of a Model Statement interview protocol on verbal cues to deceit

Background/objectives: Practitioners frequently inform us that lying through omitting information is relevant to them, yet this topic has been largely ignored by verbal lie detection researchers. Method: In the present experiment participants watched a video recording of a secret meeting between three people. Truth tellers were instructed to recall the meeting truthfully, and lie tellers were instructed to pretend that one person (John) was not there. Participants were or were not exposed to a Model Statement during the interview. The dependent variables were ‘total details’ and ‘complications’. Results: Truth tellers reported more complications than lie tellers but lie tellers reported more details than truth tellers. The Model Statement resulted in more complications and details being reported. The Veracity x Model Statement interaction effect was not significant. In terms of self-reported strategies, the main veracity difference was that truth tellers were more inclined to ‘be detailed” than lie tellers. Discussion: We discuss the atypical finding (most details reported by lie tellers) and ideas for future research.

(From the journal abstract)


Leal, S., Vrij, A., Deeb, H., Burkhardt, J., Dabrowna, O. & Fisher, R. P. (2023). Verbal Cues to Deceit when Lying through Omitting Information: Examining the Effect of a Model Statement Interview Protocol. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 15(1), 1 - 8. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2023a1

Authors: Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb
https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2023a1
Use of the model statement in determining the veracity of opinions

We examined the efficacy of a Model Statement to detect opinion lies. A total of93 participants discussed their opinion about the recent strikes on two occasions,1 week apart. In one interview they told the truth and in the other interview theylied. Each interview consisted of two phases. In Phase 1 they discussed their allegedopinion (truth or lie as appropriate). They then either listened to a Model Statement(a detailed account of someone discussing an opinion about a topic unrelated tostrike actions) and expressed their opinion again in Phase 2 (Model Statement pre-sent condition) or they discussed their opinion again without listening to a ModelStatement (Model Statement absent condition). The verbal cues examined were pro-opinion arguments, anti-opinion arguments, plausibility, immediacy, directness, clar-ity, and predictability. The truthful statements sounded more plausible in Phases1 and 2 than the deceptive statements, providing further evidence that plausibility isa strong veracity indicator. The truthful statements included more pro-argumentsand sounded more immediate and direct than the deceptive statements, but only inPhase 2. The Model Statement had no effect. Reasons for the Model Statement null-effect are discussed.

(From the journal abstract)


Mann, S., Vrij, A., & Deeb, H. (2024). Use of the model statement in determining the veracity of opinions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 38(4), e4227. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4227

Authors: Samantha Mann, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acp.4227
Verbal cues in omission lies: The effect of informing sources about the essential part of the event

People sometimes lie by omitting information. The information lie tellers then reportcould be entirely truthful. We examined whether the truthful information that lietellers report in omission lies contains verbal cues indicating that the person is lying.We made a distinction between (i) essential information (events surrounding theomission) and non-essential information (the rest); and (ii) made a distinction betweeninforming or not informing participants about the key event they witnessed. Partici-pants followed a target person. Truth tellers reported all activities truthfully; lie tellersomitted the key event. Participants were or were not informed what this key eventwas. In the analyses we discarded the information truth tellers reported about thekey event lie tellers omitted. Truth tellers reported more external and contextualdetails, more complications and fewer common knowledge details and self-handicapping strategies than lie tellers, but only when discussing essential informa-tion. Being informed had no effect.

(From the journal abstract)


Leal, S., Vrij, A., Deeb, H., & Fisher, R. P. (2024). Verbal cues in omission lies: The effect of informing sources about the essential part of the event. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 38(4), e4232. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4232

Authors: Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Ronald P. Fisher
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acp.4232

Subscribe to the CREST newsletter.

Get the latest news, events and research into security threats delivered directly to your inbox.
Sign up now
Back to top