Police Detection of Deception: Beliefs About Behavioral Cues to Deception Are Strong Even Though Contextual Evidence Is More Useful

2014 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaume Masip ◽  
Carmen Herrero
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Cues ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Cues To Deception

Behavioral Cues to Deception vs. Topic Incriminating Potential in Criminal Confessions.

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 683-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha Davis ◽  
Keith A. Markus ◽  
Stan B. Walters ◽  
Neal Vorus ◽  
Brenda Connors
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Cues ◽  
Criminal Confessions ◽  
Cues To Deception

Nonverbal Detection of Deception

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aldert Vrij
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Nonverbal Behavior ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Nonverbal Cues ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Nonverbal Behaviors ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Cues To Deception ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Speech Content

Throughout history it has been assumed that lying is accompanied by specific nonverbal behaviors; various sources still claim that nonverbal behavior is very revealing about deception. Systematic research, however, examining nonverbal cues to deceit has shown that nonverbal cues to deceit are faint and unreliable. This chapter starts with discussing under which circumstances people pay attention to nonverbal behavior and provides reasons why they do so. This is followed by a theoretical background of nonverbal cues to deception and discussions of the (weak) empirical evidence about (1) the relationship between nonverbal cues and deception, including the empirical evidence regarding the Behavior Analysis Interview and Ekman’s approach of observing facial expressions, and (2) people’s (poor) ability to detect deceit when paying attention to nonverbal behavior. Despite the popularity of observing nonverbal behavior to detect deception, analyzing speech content provides more accurate results, particularly when specific interview protocols are used.

Physiological and Behavioral Cues: Identifying Their Potential Value in Measuring Human-Robot Trust

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracy L. Sanders ◽  
Natasha Llorens ◽  
Deborah R. Billings ◽  
Kristin E. Schaefer ◽  
Peter A. Hancock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Potential Value ◽  
Behavioral Cues

The Detection of Deception Using the Steady-State Visual Evoked Field

2012 ◽  
Vol 132 (10) ◽  
pp. 343-347
Author(s):  
Shota Katayama ◽  
Yusuke Itabashi ◽  
Keita Tanaka ◽  
Yoshinori Uchikawa
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Visual Evoked

Spotting a liar by looking for microexpressions: Challenges and Opportunities

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xunbing Shen
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Deception Detection ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
High Stake ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Cues To Deception ◽  
The Relationship

Microexpressions do exist, and they are regarded as valid cues to deception by many researchers, furthermore, there is a lot of empirical evidence which substantiates this claim. However, some researchers don’t think the microexpression can be a way to catch a liar. The author elucidates the theories predicting that looking for microexpressions can be a way to catch a liar, and notes that some data can support for the utilization of microexpressions as a good way to detect deception. In addition, the author thinks that the mixed results in the area of investigating microexpressions and deception detection may be moderated by the stake. More empirical studies which employ high-stake lies to explore the relationship between microexpressions and deception detection are needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document