Maximizing the effects of strategic use of evidence: General-to-specific disclosure of evidence

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Luke ◽  
Maria Hartwig ◽  
Laure Brimbal ◽  
Ginny Chan ◽  
Sarah Lynn Jordan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Use Of Evidence

scholarly journals What to Reveal and what to Conceal? An Empirical Examination of Guilty Suspects’ Strategies

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghana Srivatsav ◽  
Timothy John Luke ◽  
Pär Anders Granhag ◽  
Leif Strömwall ◽  
Aldert Vrij
Keyword(s):  
Prior Knowledge ◽  
Unexpected Finding ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Evidence Disclosure ◽  
Strategic Use Of Evidence ◽  
The Cost

With Study 1 (N=140), we aimed to examine how different ways of disclosing evidence during an interview would influence guilty suspects’ perception of interviewer’s prior knowledge and elicit statement-evidence inconsistencies. We predicted that interviews with evidence disclosed would elicit low statement-evidence inconsistencies whereas interviews where evidence was not disclosed would result in high statement-evidence inconsistencies. The outcome did not support our predictions. Guilty suspects revealed crime-related information about non-critical themes and withheld information regarding critical themes irrespective of evidence disclosure. We explored this unexpected finding in Study 2 (N=216), which was designed to understand if guilty suspects would reveal information regarding themes of the crime that are not incriminating (not critical) in comparison to themes that were incriminating (critical) as observed in Study 1. We used the evidence disclosure tactics of Study 1 in Study 2 and also measured how these influence their perception of interviewer’s knowledge. The outcome replicated findings from Study 1 that guilty suspects reveal or withhold information based on the cost of disclosing the information. This is a novel finding in the Strategic Use of Evidence literature.

Interviewing to Elicit Cues to Deception: Improving Strategic Use of Evidence with General-To-Specific Framing of Evidence

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Luke ◽  
Maria Hartwig ◽  
Laure Brimbal ◽  
Ginny Chan ◽  
Sarah Jordan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Use Of Evidence ◽  
Cues To Deception

The Strategic Use of Evidence Technique

2014 ◽  
pp. 231-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pär anders Granhag ◽  
Maria Hartwig
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Use Of Evidence

Countermeasures Against the Strategic Use of Evidence Technique: Effects on Suspects' Strategies

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Luke ◽  
Maria Hartwig ◽  
Benjamin Shamash ◽  
Pär Anders Granhag
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Use Of Evidence

scholarly journals Active Deception Detection

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Levine
Keyword(s):  
Deception Detection ◽  
Lie Detection ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Question Asking ◽  
Communication Content ◽  
Highly Effective ◽  
Detecting Deception ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Strategic Use Of Evidence ◽  
Better Than

Actively detecting deception requires (a) gathering information for fact-checking the communication content, (b) strategically prompting deception cues, and (c) encouraging honest admissions and discouraging continued deceit. Most deception-detection research, active or otherwise, finds that people are only slightly better than chance at correctly distinguishing truth from lies. Poor accuracy stems from a lack of reliable deception cues that hold across people and situations. Consequently, basing lie detection on deception cues is prone to error. However, some approaches to active deception detection yield higher accuracy than passive observation. Not all active approaches are advantageous. Mere interaction and mere question-asking produce outcomes similar to passive observation. Evidence-based and confession-solicitation approaches can be highly effective: for example, strategic use of evidence (SUE) and the content in context approach.

scholarly journals The strategic use of evidence and gap maps to build evidence architecture

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard White ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Working Paper ◽  
Strategic Use Of Evidence ◽  
Synthesis Approach ◽  
Policy Question

Mapping is an evidence synthesis approach that aims to describe what research evidence is available that is relevant to a particular research or policy question. It has emerged as an important way to make evidence available to decision-makers. The CEDIL Methods Working Paper 5, ‘The strategic use of evidence and gap maps to build evidence architecture’, describes this approach.

Building a Case

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Luke ◽  
Maria Hartwig ◽  
Laure Brimbal ◽  
Pär Anders Granhag
Keyword(s):  
Deception Detection ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Psychological Literature ◽  
Criminal Investigations ◽  
Empirically Supported ◽  
Strategic Use Of Evidence ◽  
Interviewing Technique ◽  
Interviewing Techniques

This chapter explores the role of scientifically-grounded interviewing approaches in criminal investigations and prosecution. It develops a “case construction” perspective, in which the effectiveness of interviewing techniques can be evaluated based on their usefulness for accurately distinguishing between innocent and guilty suspects and for providing evidence that is useful for prosecuting a guilty defendant. The chapter reviews the psychological literature of deception detection, interviewing, and interrogation, viewed through the lens of case construction. Special focus is given to the Strategic Use of Evidence technique, an empirically supported and theoretically based interviewing technique that has shown promise for is use in constructing a case.

Strategic Use of Evidence During Investigative Interviews

2014 ◽  
pp. 1-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Hartwig ◽  
Pär Anders Granhag ◽  
Timothy Luke
Keyword(s):  
Investigative Interviews ◽  
Strategic Use Of Evidence
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document