Detecting Lies and Deceit E-Book

Aldert Vrij

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Serie: Wiley Series in The Psychology of Crime, Policing and Law
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 956

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

Why do people lie? Do gender and personality differences affect how people lie? How can lies be detected? Detecting Lies and Deceit provides the most comprehensive review of deception to date. This revised edition provides an up-to-date account of deception research and discusses the working and efficacy of the most commonly used lie detection tools, including: * Behaviour Analysis Interview * Statement Validity Assessment * Reality Monitoring * Scientific Content Analysis * Several different polygraph tests * Voice Stress Analysis * Thermal Imaging * EEG-P300 * Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) All three aspects of deception are covered: nonverbal cues, speech and written statement analysis and (neuro)physiological responses. The most common errors in lie detection are discussed and practical guidelines are provided to help professionals improve their lie detection skills. Detecting Lies and Deceit is a must-have resource for students, academics and professionals in psychology, criminology, policing and law.

Leseprobe

Contents

Series

Title

Copyright

About the Author

Series Preface

Preface

Acknowledgements

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

MYTHS IN DECEPTION

GOOD LIARS AND POOR LIE DETECTORS

LACK OF REALISM

THE CONTENT OF THIS BOOK

CHAPTER 2 Lying: A Selfish Act and a Social Lubricant

A DEFINITION OF DECEPTION

TYPES OF LIES

REASONS WHY PEOPLE LIE

FREQUENCY OF LYING

WHO DO PEOPLE LIE TO?

SITUATIONAL FACTORS: A JOB AND A DATE

PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LIAR

LYING AS A SOCIAL LUBRICANT AND SELFISH ACT

CHAPTER 3 Nonverbal Behaviour and Deception

THREE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON NONVERBAL CUES TO DECEPTION

METHODS OF INVESTIGATING NONVERBAL BEHAVIOUR WHEN LYING

THE BEHAVIOUR OF A LIAR

REASONS FOR FEW NONVERBAL CUES TO DECEPTION

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 4 Individual Verbal Cues to Deception

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

THE SPEECH CONTENT OF A LIAR

SITUATIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 5 Beliefs About Nonverbal and Verbal Cues to Deception

PEOPLE’S BELIEFS ABOUT DECEPTIVE BEHAVIOUR AND SPEECH

ACCURACY OF BELIEFS

THE ORIGIN OF INCORRECT BELIEFS ABOUT NONVERBAL AND VERBAL CUES TO DECEPTION

WHY INCORRECT BELIEFS ABOUT NONVERBAL AND VERBAL CUES TO DECEPTION LAST

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 6 Lie Detection Without Using Specialised Tools

THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF NONVERBAL AND VERBAL BEHAVIOUR IN CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

LAYPERSONS’ ABILITY TO DETECT LIES IN STRANGERS

LAYPERSONS’ ABILITY TO DETECT LIES IN FRIENDS AND ROMANTIC PARTNERS

LAYPERSONS’ ABILITY TO DETECT LIES IN CHILDREN

PROFESSIONAL LIE CATCHERS’ ABILITY TO DETECT DECEPTION IN ADULTS

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN THE ABILITY TO IDENTIFY TRUTHS AND LIES

FACTORS AFFECTING VERACITY JUDGEMENTS

DISCUSSION

CHAPTER 7 The Behaviour Analysis Interview

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE BAI

THE BAI PROTOCOL AND ITS UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS

RESEARCH RELATED TO THE BEHAVIOUR ANALYSIS INTERVIEW

EVALUATION OF THE BAI TECHNIQUE

CHAPTER 8 Statement Validity Assessment

THE HISTORY OF SVA

THE FOUR STAGES OF STATEMENT VALIDITY ASSESSMENT

A LITERATURE REVIEW OF CBCA STUDIES

SUPPORT FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CRITERION AND TOTAL CBCA SCORE

CORRECT CLASSIFICATIONS OF TRUTH TELLERS AND LIARS ON THE BASIS OF CBCA SCORES

VALIDITY CHECKLIST: RESEARCH FINDINGS

BELIEFS ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CBCA CRITERIA AND TRUTH TELLING

VALIDITY CHECKLIST: REFLECTIONS

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

EVALUATION OF SVA

CHAPTER 9 Reality Monitoring

INSIGHT INTO PEOPLE’S MEMORY

DETECTING FALSE MEMORIES

REALITY MONITORING AND DECEPTION

INTER-RATER RELIABILITY SCORES

REALITY MONITORING AS A LIE DETECTION TOOL

ACCURACY RATES IN REALITY MONITORING STUDIES

EVALUATION OF REALITY MONITORING AS A LIE DETECTION TOOL

CHAPTER 10 Scientific Content Analysis

THE SCAN PROCEDURE

SCAN AS A LIE DETECTION TOOL

EVALUATION OF THE SCAN TECHNIQUE

CHAPTER 11 Physiological Lie Detection: The Concern Approach

CONCERN-BASED POLYGRAPH TESTS

ACCURACY OF CQT POLYGRAPH EXAMINATIONS

PERSONALITY AND THE POLYGRAPH

(PRE)EMPLOYMENT SCREENING

POLYGRAPH TESTS WITH SEX OFFENDERS

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

VOICE STRESS ANALYSIS AND THERMAL IMAGING

EVALUATION OF CONCERN-BASED POLYGRAPH TESTS

CHAPTER 12 Physiological Lie Detection: The Orienting Reflex Approach

THE GUILTY KNOWLEDGE TEST

CRITICISM CONCERNING THE GUILTY KNOWLEDGE TEST

ACCURACY OF GKT POLYGRAPH EXAMINATIONS

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS: THE P300 BRAIN WAVE

EVALUATION OF THE GKT

CHAPTER 13 Physiological Lie Detection: functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)

fMRI LIE DETECTION RESEARCH

A CLOSE LOOK AT THE fMRI LIE DETECTION TOOL

EVALUATION OF THE fMRI LIE DETECTION TECHNIQUE

CHAPTER 14 Pitfalls: Why People Fail To Catch Liars

LACK OF MOTIVATION TO CATCH LIARS

LIE DETECTION IS A DIFFICULT TASK

COMMON ERRORS MADE BY LIE DETECTORS

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 15 Opportunities: How People Can Improve Their Lie Detection Skills

ACCURACY OF THE DIFFERENT LIE DETECTION METHODS

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN SPEECH ANALYSIS AND PHYSIOLOGICAL LIE DETECTION

GUIDELINES TO CATCH LIARS BY EXAMINING NONVERBAL AND VERBAL BEHAVIOUR

Epilogue

References

References

Index

Wiley Series in

The Psychology of Crime, Policing and Law

Series Editors

Graham Davies and Ray Bull

University of Leicester, UK

The Wiley Series in the Psychology of Crime, Policing and Law publishes concise and integrative reviews on important emerging areas of contemporary research. The purpose of the series is not merely to present research findings in a clear and readable form, but also to bring out their implications for both practice and policy. In this way, it is hoped the series will not only be useful to psychologists but also to all those concerned with crime detection and prevention, policing, and the judicial process. Current titles of interest in the series include:

Offender Profiling: Theory, Research and Practice

Edited by Janet L. Jackson and Debra A. Bekerian

Psychology, Law and Eyewitness Testimony

Peter B. Ainsworth

Detecting Lies and Deceit: The Psychology of Lying and the Implications for Professional Practice

Aldert Vrij

Children’s Testimony: A Handbook of Psychological Research and Forensic Practice

Edited by Helen L. Westcott, Graham M. Davies and Ray H.C. Bull

Stalking and Psychosexual Obsession: Psychological Perspectives for Prevention, Policing and Treatment

Edited by Julian Boon and Lorraine Sheridan

The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions: A Handbook

Gisli H. Gudjonsson

Terrorists, Victims and Society: Psychological Perspectives on Terrorism and its Consequences

Edited by Andrew Silke

Reducing Crime: The Effectiveness of Criminal Justice Intervention

Edited by Amanda Perry, Cynthia McDougall and Dave P. Farrington

Practical Psychology for Forensic Investigations and Prosecutions

Edited by Mark Kebbell and Graham Davies

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England

Telephone [phone]

Email (for orders and customer service enquiries): cs-books@wiley. co.

Visitour Home Page on www.wiley.com

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except under the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or under the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 4LP, UK, without the permission in writing of the Publisher. Requests to the Publisher should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex P019 8SQ, England, or emailed to [email protected], or faxed to ([phone].

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The Publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Other Wiley Editorial Offices

John Wiley & Sons Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103–1741, USA

Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, Boschstr. 12, D-69469 Weinheim, Germany

John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd, 42 McDougall Street, Milton, Queensland 4064, Australia

John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, 2 Clementi Loop #02-01, Jin Xing Distripark, Singapore 129809

John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd, 6045 Freemont Blvd, Mississauga, ONT, L5R 4J3, Canada

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available is electronic books.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

About the Author

Aldert Vrij is a Professor of Applied Social Psychology in the Department of Psychology at the University of Portsmouth (UK). He has published more than 300 articles and book chapters to date, mainly on the subjects of nonverbal and verbal cues to deception and lie detection. He also advises the police about conducting interviews with suspects, acts as an Expert Witness in court, and gives invited talks and workshops on lie detection to practitioners and scholars across the world. He is at present Editor of Legal and Criminological Psychology, a forensic journal published by the British Psychological Society.

Series Preface

The Wiley Series on the Psychology of Crime, Policing and the Law publishes reviews of important areas of contemporary research. The purpose of the series is not only to present research findings in a clear and readable form, but also to bring out their implications for both policy and practice. In this way, it is hoped that the series will not only be of use to psychologists, but also to all those concerned with crime detection and prevention, policing and judicial processes.

The current volume has a focus on detecting lies and deceit and therefore also on detecting truth. The opening chapter importantly deals with widely held myths concerning detecting deception and the (consequent) errors people make when trying to decide if someone is being deceptive or truthful. The next chapter notes that many people often lie (if only for the best of intentions). Thus, most people may learn how to lie successfully. The third and fourth chapters present knowledgeable, in-depth overviews: (a) of the various psychological theories that have been offered concerning nonverbal and verbal behaviours/cues which may relate to deception/truthfulness and (b) of the cues found by research actually to be related to deception. The fifth chapter reviews the growing body of research on people’s beliefs about which cues they think are indicative of lying and the origins of the many beliefs that the research presented in the previous two chapters reveals to be false beliefs. A comprehensive chapter follows on how good people are at detecting truth/lies, including relevant professionals.

Chapters 7 to 10 examine a variety of procedures/techniques that have been developed to try to determine deception/truthfulness from people’s behaviour and speech. A number of these procedures, including some widely marketed around the world, have not been found by published research to be effective. Indeed, reliance on them could result in the innocent being persecuted and the guilty remaining at large to carry out further wrong-doing.

Chapters 11 to 13 focus on attempts to detect deception from bodily/ brain activity. Here, the available research again confirms that many such procedures achieve levels of performance not far from, or close to, chance. These chapters and chapter 14 also seek to explain why catching liars is often so difficult.

The crucial closing chapter focuses on how people might improve their lie detection skills, not in the ill-informed way that many books on catching liars claim, but in an in-depth way informed by a wealth of psychological theory and research.

In this broad and deep second edition (that cites close to 1100 references) Professor Aldert Vrij remarkably has managed to produce a book of even greater quality than his (2000) first edition (which had an impact world-wide). It is an example of scholarship at the highest level. This book will help people realise why it is usually so difficult to discriminate lying from truth-telling – honestly it will!

RAY BULL

and

GRAHAM DAVIES

August2007

Preface

When I published my Detecting Lies and Deceit book in 2000, I did not anticipate publishing a second edition for at least a decade. However, important events have changed my mind. Since 2000, the world has experienced several terror attacks and security threats, and the United States started its “War on terror”. Against this background, the desire to detect lies has become more urgent than ever before and governments are calling upon scholars to design lie detection tools to protect their citizens from attack.

Scientists have responded by conducting research, and at present more than 150 articles on deception and lie detection are published in peer-reviewed journals each year. Several scholars have claimed that they have developed lie detection tools that are highly accurate, and they encourage governments to use their tools. What do they propose? Is it substance, is it spin, or perhaps a mixture of both? My view is that substance and spin are often intertwined. I also believe that the only way to distinguish between the two is by providing a comprehensive overview of facts regarding lying and lie detection. A factual account enables the reader to generate an informed opinion about how accurate these claims are.

This book provides a comprehensive review of deception research published to date. It is different from the previous edition in several aspects. First, the old text is updated and hundreds of new studies have been added. Second, it also contains descriptions of lie detection methods that were not discussed in the 2000 edition, such as the Behaviour Analysis Interview, Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), Voice Stress Analysis, thermal imaging, P300 brain wave research, and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) research. Third, because so much has changed in the world of deception research, it was essentially easier to mostly rewrite my book than try to add in new developments. I therefore rewrote and restructured most of the old text. For example, this book provides overview chapters regarding why professionals often fail to detect deceit and what they can do to become better lie detectors. Such chapters were not included in the 2000 edition.

The result, I believe, is a book about deception that is better structured and more comprehensive than the 2000 edition. I also realise that this book contains considerably more text than the 2000 edition, and so perhaps readers will prefer to dip into individual chapters rather than read the book from beginning to end. To facilitate this, I have ensured that the chapters can be read independently from each other.

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to Dr Samantha Mann for her valued comments on previous drafts of this book. I also would like to thank Dr Sharon Leal for her insightful comments on the physiological chapters (Chapters 11 to 13) and Chapter 15, and Professor Pär Anders Granhag for his constructive help with Chapter 15. I also wish to express gratitude to the institutions that have funded my research in the past and at present. These are in alphabetical order: the British Academy, the Dutch Government, the Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), the Leverhulme Trust, the Nuffield Foundation, the UK Government, the US Government and the University of Portsmouth. Without their financial support, I could not have carried out my research and would not have written this book. In many of my studies the participants were police officers from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. I highly appreciate their willingness to participate, because it gives invaluable insight into the views and skills of people who detect lies on a professional basis. I am also grateful to the police for giving us access to videotapes of police–suspect interviews. This gave us the opportunity to conduct unique research into the behaviour of truth tellers and liars in realistic high-stakes situations. Finally, I am grateful to John Wiley & Sons for publishing a second edition of this book.

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

MYTHS IN DECEPTION

Everybody knows what it is to lie, and this familiarity with lying surely makes us knowledgeable about deception.1 For example, we all know that lying is undesirable. We therefore rarely lie ourselves since decent people do not make a habit of lying, and this lack of practice makes us poor liars. Because lying is so undesirable, we prefer not to be lied to. We therefore do not wish to spend time with liars and try to avoid them.

Fortunately, most people we know do not make good liars either. They reveal their deceit by behaving nervously and avoiding eye contact. Hence, just by observing someone’s behaviour we can often spot a liar. We are rather good lie detectors, particularly when spotting mendacity in our own children, partners, and close friends.

Of course, conmen, smugglers, and other types of criminals try to achieve their aims by means of deceit, and, if successful, they could do us a lot of harm. Fortunately, we are well protected against them, because professional lie catchers are good at spotting such liars. The additional benefit these professionals have is that they can rely upon specialised lie detection equipment. Indeed, some of the machines that were used in the past may have proven to be unreliable, but a lot has changed since then. For example, technological developments such as brain scanners mean that researchers have now direct access to people’s thoughts and feelings and therefore can tell with certainty whether someone is lying. Moreover, professionals nowadays use much more sophisticated interrogation techniques to catch liars than they did in the past.

Correct? Actually. . . . No. All of the above statements mentioned here are myths rather than facts, and I will unravel those myths in this book.

GOOD LIARS AND POOR LIE DETECTORS

People tend to underestimate their own ability to lie (Elaad, 2003). There are several reasons why people think they are worse liars than they actually are. First, they tend to overestimate the extent to which their own thoughts, emotions, and other mental states are transparent to others (e.g., illusion of transparency, Gilovich, Savitsky, & Medvec, 1998). In other words, people mistakenly believe that their lies shine through. Second, self-perceptions are typically characterised by positive illusions (Taylor & Brown, 1988), and people typically think of themselves as being more moral than most others (Kaplar & Gordon, 2004). Admitting to being a good liar does not match with this positive selfimage. Third, although people tell more white lies than serious lies, they remember their serious lies better than their white lies (Elaad, 2003). This book shows that it is often somewhat easier to detect serious lies than white lies, so people mostly remember the lies that probably were more easily detected (serious lies). Finally, perhaps people remember better those times when their lies failed than when they lied successfully, particularly if these failed lies resulted in negative consequences. By forgetting the times they lied successfully, they may underestimate how often their lies succeed.

People tend to overestimate their own ability to detect lies (Elaad, 2003) and more lies remain unnoticed than they generally think. There are many reasons why lies remain undetected, and they can be clustered into three main categories (Vrij, 2007): poor motivation; difficulties associated with lie detection; and common errors made by lie detectors.

Poor Motivation: The Ostrich Effect

One reason why lies remain unnoticed is that often people do not attempt to detect them, because they do not want to learn the truth. I label this phenomenon the ostrich effect. There are at least three reasons why someone might not want to know the truth. First, a fabrication might sometimes sound more pleasant than the truth, and in such cases ignorance might be preferable. For example, why bother trying to discover whether mendacious compliments about one’s body shape, hairstyle, dress sense, or achievements and so on, are truthful?

Second, people sometimes do not investigate whether they have been lied to because they fear the consequences the truth may hold. Some statistics suggest that up to 50% of men and 40% of women engage in extramarital relations (Feldman & Cauffman, 1999), yet many of them will remain undiscovered. A husband, for example, might try to dismiss suspicions that his wife is having an affair and avoid discovering the truth, because if he were to discover the truth and confront her with his knowledge about her lover, she may decide to leave her husband. This may be something he does not want her to do. Therefore, communicating what he has discovered may have undesirable consequences for the betrayed man and, upon realising this, he may decide not to investigate the issue. After the scandal with Monica Lewinsky broke, President Clinton told his aides in the White House that he did not have a sexual relationship with her. Erskine Bowles, the White House Chief of Staff at that time, was more than willing to believe him. This is how he described that moment to the Grand Jury: “All I can tell you is: This guy who I’ve worked for looked me in the eye and said he did not have sexual relationships with her. And if I didn’t believe him, I couldn’t stay. So I believe him” (The Independent, 14 September 1998, p. 4).

Third, people sometimes do not want to detect lies because they would not know what to do if they came to know the truth. Most guests, for instance, will not try to find out whether their host is truthful in his claims that he likes their presents, because what would they do if they discovered that he did not like their presents? More serious lies may remain undetected for the same reason. Suppose that the husband’s wife in the example above decides not to leave him, what should he himself do instead? Once betrayed, the cuckolded husband may have trouble trusting his wife again, and the repercussions of such a discovery may take a very long time to resolve. President Clinton’s personal secretary, Betty Currie, tried to avoid learning details of the relationship between President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky probably for the same reason. On one occasion, Lewinsky said to Currie of herself and the President: “As long as no one saw us – and no one did – then nothing happened.” Ms Currie responded: “Don’t want to hear it. Don’t say any more. I don’t want to hear any more” (The Observer, 13 September 1998, p. 8). Indeed, it is clear to see that knowledge of the affair would put Ms Currie in a difficult situation, forcing her between publicly declaring this knowledge or acting as an ally, and that is why she probably preferred to remain ignorant.

Difficulties Associated with Lie Detection

As I will demonstrate in this book, even when people try to detect lies, they often fail to do so. Research has indicated that even professional lie catchers, such as customs officers and police officers, often make incorrect decisions, and that their ability to separate truths from lies typically does not exceed that of laypersons. One category of reasons why even motivated people fail to catch liars is because lie detection is difficult. Perhaps the main difficulty is that, as this book reveals, not a single nonverbal, verbal, or physiological response is uniquely associated with deception. In other words, the equivalent of Pinocchio’s growing nose does not exist. This means that there is no single response that the lie detector can truly rely upon. Another difficulty is that liars who are motivated to avoid being caught may attempt to exhibit nonverbal, verbal, or physiological responses that they believe make an honest impression on lie detectors. As we will see, liars who employ such so-called countermeasures can indeed often fool professional lie detectors.

Common Errors Made by Lie Detectors

Another category of reasons why people fail in their attempts to catch liars is that they make errors. In this book I will discuss numerous errors that lie detectors commonly make, including a tendency to pay attention to cues that are not reliably associated with deception. One reason as to why they focus on those non-diagnostic cues is because they are taught to do so. For example, Inbau and his colleagues wrote an influential handbook about how to interrogate suspects. The most recent, fourth edition, of this book appeared in 2001 (Inbau, Reid, Buckley, & Jayne, 2001).2 In their book, they provide information about how lying suspects usually behave. According to Inbau and colleagues, behavioural cues to deception include posture changes, gaze aversion, self-adaptors (stroking back of head, touching nose, straightening or stroking hair, pulling threads on clothing and so on), placing a hand over the mouth or eyes when speaking, and hiding hands (by sitting on them) or hiding feet (by pulling them under the chair). In particular the beliefs that liars place their hands over the mouth or eyes or that they avert their gaze are frequently mentioned in the police literature (Brougham, 1992; Gordon & Fleisher, 2002; Kuhlman, 1980; Macdonald & Michaud, 1992; McKinnon, 1982; Rabon, 1992; Walkley, 1985; Walters, 1996; Waltman, 1983; Yeschke, 1997; Zulawski & Wicklander, 1993). As I will demonstrate, these behavioural cues to deception, and most of the other behavioural cues to deception mentioned by Inbau et al., are not identified as such in the existing deception literature. There is evidence that lie detectors who pay attention to these cues actually perform worse than those who do not (Kassin & Fong, 1999; Mann, Vrij, & Bull, 2004).

LACK OF REALISM

People’s tendency to be overconfident in their ability to detect lies becomes evident when reading the deception literature or listening to practitioners. In principle, lies can be detected via observing someone’s behaviour, analysing their speech, or measuring their physiological responses. In all three areas practitioners and researchers can be found who make bold claims about their ability to detect lies that they fail to back up with research findings. Several examples illustrate this. Paul Ekman, an American emeritus professor of psychology, has specialised in nonverbal cues to deceit. His work has inspired academics and practitioners for several decades. Not long ago, he claimed that his system of lie detection can be taught to anyone with an accuracy of more than 95% (New York Times Magazine, 5 February 2006; see also WashingtonPost, 29 October 2006 for a similar statement). There is, however, no study published to support this claim (Chapter 6).

One of the interview techniques discussed in detail in Inbau et al.’s (2001) manual is the Behaviour Analysis Interview (BAI). This manual is linked to a training programme where John E. Reid and Associates teach practitioners the BAI method and other methods. On their website, http://www.reid.com/training_programs/r_interview.html, they report that more than 300,000 professionals in the law enforcement and security fields have attended their three-day programme since it was first offered in 1974. They further claim that interviewers specifically trained and experienced in behaviour analysis assessment can correctly identify the truthfulness of a person 85% of the time (Inbau et al., 2001). However, conclusive evidence to support this claim is lacking (Chapter 7, see also Blair & Kooi, 2004).

Udo Undeutsch, a German emeritus professor of psychology, laid the foundations for a verbal lie detection tool nowadays called Statement Validity Assessment (SVA). He reported that the method has been applied in thousands of criminal cases investigating child sexual abuse in Germany and Sweden and that in no single case has the outcome been later contradicted by other relevant evidence (Undeutsch, 1982). This suggests that the method is highly accurate. However, such a premise is not supported by SVA research. In the SVA chapter I discuss an alternative reason for why the verdicts of SVA experts are unlikely to be contradicted: there is often no factual evidence available in child sexual abuse cases, and therefore often no opportunity to falsify the claims made by SVA experts (Chapter 8).

The debate about the use of the polygraph as a lie detector is heated, as will be explained in this book. Faith in the accuracy of the polygraph is high among practitioners. Dan Sosnowski, an American polygraph examiner, claimed that evaluation of the polygraph in the US has showed that it detects deception with 97% accuracy (The Independent, 11 October, 1999, p. 1). Sosnowski’s claim is exaggerated and strong faith in the accuracy of the polygraph can be questioned on the basis of the scientific polygraph literature (Chapter 11).

Pavlidis, Eberhardt, and Levine (2002a) reported in the prestigious journal Nature that they have developed a high-definition thermalimaging technique that can detect attempted deceit by recording thermal patterns around the eyes. They suggested that the technique has the potential to be used in rapid security screening without the need for skilled staff or physical contact. Unsurprisingly, their article attracted considerable media attention, because it sounds promising: it implies that the device could be used at airports to detect smugglers and potential terrorists. However, in their subsequent erratum Pavlidis, Eberhardt, and Levine (2002b) fell somewhat short from this claim by mentioning that “it was not intended to convey the impression that this thermal imaging technique is already suitable for mass securityscreening purposes” (italics added by me). As I will explain in this book, it is doubtful whether lies could ever be reliably detected in the way suggested in the Nature article (Chapter 11).

Not long after the introduction of measuring brain responses, claims have been made that these techniques can be highly successful in catching liars. For example, Dr Farwell developed a “brain fingerprinting” technique that he aggressively promotes on his company’s website www.brainwavescience.com. He claims high accuracy in classifying truth tellers and liars by measuring their brain waves. Others are less convinced. Wolpe, Foster, and Langleben (2003) reported that relatively few participants were actually tested and most of the data regarding brain fingerprinting are not published in peer reviewed literature.3 The latter point means that rigorous scientific scrutiny of Farwell’s technique has not yet taken place. To back up his claim of high accuracy, Farwell refers on his website to his study with Smith published in 2001. In their well-documented report, the National Research Council (2003, p. 162) discuss this study and note that “the range of stimuli to which examinees were exposed were very small, and the sample size was very small . . . Whether these findings generalise to other, more complex contexts in larger groups is not known.” Interesting is the view of Emanuel Donchin, a psychophysiologist working at the University of South Florida, and Farwell’s former graduate adviser and co-author on one of Farwell’s articles. Reflecting on Farwell’s technique he reports that “The necessary research has never been done” (Knight, 2004). In other words, the accuracy of brain fingerprinting is not as well established as Dr Farwell suggests (Chapter 12).

Ruben Gur examines activity in brain structures and areas. He is part of a research group that claims that their test is 99% accurate in distinguishing truths from lies and ready to detect terrorists (Wild, 2005). The 99% accuracy study has not been published in a peer reviewed journal, and the accuracy rates that have been published in such journals to date are lower. Moreover, the premise behind the lie detection technique Gur promotes could be too simplistic. Gur claims that “a lie is always more complicated than the truth” (Wild, 2005), which is not necessarily the case, as this book reveals (Chapter 13).

THE CONTENT OF THIS BOOK

This book discusses nonverbal, verbal, and physiological indicators of deceit and the ability to detect lies on the basis of these indicators. In particular, I will address two questions: (1) Are there systematic differences between truth tellers and liars in nonverbal behaviour, speech content, and physiological responses? And (2) to what extent are observers able to distinguish between truths and lies when they examine someone’s nonverbal behaviour, speech content, and physiological responses?

I commence this book with general information about deception. After defining deception, I describe which types of lie exist, the reasons why people lie, estimates of how often people lie, and individual differences in telling lies. Chapter 2 shows that lying is very much part of everyday life, and that the role of lying in social communication is two-pronged: sometimes lying causes harm to the ones who are lied to, but many lies told in daily life are white lies that may even benefit the lie receivers, often serving as a social lubricant.

Chapter 3 describes the relationship between nonverbal behaviour and deception. I present several theories as to why nonverbal cues to deception may emerge, and discuss research examining the behaviours displayed by truth tellers and liars. This includes research about the behaviours exhibited by suspects in police interviews and by the politicians Bill Clinton and Saddam Hussein. The chapter reveals that most nonverbal cues appear not to be associated with deception and some nonverbal cues are, at best, only weakly related to deception. It further shows that the relationship between nonverbal behaviour and deception is complicated, amongst other reasons because different people show different cues to deception, and because a liar’s behaviour depends on the context in which the lie takes place.

Chapter 4 is the first of five chapters examining verbal cues to deception. The verbal cues discussed in later chapters (Chapters 7 to 10) form part of existing verbal lie detection tools used by professional lie catchers and scholars. In Chapter 4 I summarise verbal cues that are not part of such existing tools. This chapter shows that some of these verbal cues show weak relationships with deception.

In Chapter 5 I discuss how people believe liars behave and what they think they say. This chapter reveals that people often hold erroneous views about nonverbal and verbal cues to deception. Many cues that people believe are indicators of deceit are actually not related to deception, whereas some cues that they do not associate with deceit are in fact weakly related to deception. This chapter also shows that these erroneous views are held across the world and by both laypersons and professional lie catchers, such as police officers, customs officers, immigration officers, and prison officers.

Chapter 6 discusses how accurate laypersons are in detecting truths and lies in people they do not know, or in their friends, romantic partners and children, when they rely on the alleged liar’s nonverbal and verbal behaviour. The chapter shows that people are typically poor at this task under such circumstances, even if it concerns the truths and lies told by friends and relatives. This chapter further discusses how good professional lie detectors are in distinguishing truths from lies when they pay attention to someone’s nonverbal and verbal behaviour. The chapter shows that they typically do not fare better than laypersons.

Chapters 7 to 13 discuss the various lie detection tools used by professionals and scholars. Chapter 7 deals with the Behaviour Analysis Interview (BAI), the only professional lie detection tool to date that examines nonverbal cues to deception. BAI, however, also examines some verbal cues. BAI is taught to practitioners all over the world. In Chapter 8 I describe Statement Validity Assessment (SVA), a verbal veracity assessment tool developed in Germany and Sweden to assess the credibility of statements made by alleged victims of sexual abuse. To date, SVA is the most widely used verbal veracity detection instrument and SVA assessments are accepted as evidence in criminal courts in several countries. Chapter 9 introduces Reality Monitoring (RM), another verbal veracity assessment tool. As far as I know, RM is not used by practitioners but it is popular amongst scholars, perhaps because it has a strong theoretical foundation. In Chapter 10 I discuss Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN). Like BAI, SCAN is taught worldwide.

Chapters 11 to 13 deal with physiological cues to deception. Throughout history it has been assumed that lying is accompanied by physiological activity within the liar’s body. This activity is nowadays measured in different ways, mostly with a machine called a polygraph, also referred to as a lie detector (this labelling, however, is misleading as I discuss in Chapter 11). For lie detection purposes the polygraph measures finger sweating, blood pressure, and respiration. There are different theoretical rationales as to why truth tellers and liars may show different physiological responses while being attached to the polygraph. These different rationales lead to different interview protocols. Concern-based interview protocols are discussed in Chapter 11 and orienting reflexbased interview protocols in Chapter 12. Although concern-based interview protocols are used worldwide, the use of orienting reflex-based interview protocols is restricted to mainly Japan and Israel.

In Chapter 11 I also discuss thermal imaging, a technique that measures the blood flow around the eyes, and voice stress analysis, a technique that measures tremors and other aspects of the voice, both of which are concern-based lie detection techniques; and in Chapter 12 I also discuss a technique based on the orienting reflex that measures P300 brain waves via electroencephalograms (EEG-P300). Such alternatives techniques to polygraph testing are sometimes presented as fundamentally different from polygraph testing, but such claims are misleading. They measure concern or the orienting reflex differently from the polygraph, but use the same concern-based and orienting reflex-based interview protocols as employed in polygraph testing. Therefore, these techniques share the strengths and weaknesses associated with these two types of interview protocols.

In Chapter 13 I describe lie detection based on measuring activity in brain structures and areas. These activities are measured with a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scanner. This is the most recent development in physiological lie detection, but, again, not fundamentally different from polygraph testing. The fMRI lie detection tool employs the same concern-based and orienting reflex-based interview protocols as used in traditional polygraph testing.

A review of the scientific literature discussed in Chapters 7 to 13 reveals that truth and lies are detected at levels well below perfection with each of these veracity assessment tools. However, it also shows that with several of these techniques truths and lies can be detected more accurately than by simply observing someone’s nonverbal and verbal behaviour.4

Chapters 3 to 13 show several pitfalls in lie detection. I present these pitfalls in a systematic manner in Chapter 14 and provide 15 reasons as to why people fail to catch liars. The final chapter (Chapter 15) deals with improving lie detection skills. I make some suggestions about how to improve lie detection via analysing speech or measuring physiological responses. I will argue that collaboration between deception researchers and researchers in other areas of psychology is therefore needed. Most of Chapter 15 deals with how to improve lie detection via observing someone’s nonverbal or verbal behaviour, and I present 17 guidelines that lie detectors could use to detect deceit in this manner. In this chapter I pay more attention to this type of lie detection than to that based on speech analysis or physiological responses and I do this for two reasons. First, it is the most inaccurate type of lie detection, and therefore perhaps mostly in need of improvement. Second, this form of lie detection can be used in many more situations than the other two types of lie detection, because it does not require transcribing someone’s speech (necessary for many speech analysis protocols) or equipment such as a polygraph, a cap containing electrodes (often used to record EEGs), or fMRI scan.

1I will use the terms lying and deception interchangeably.

2 Although there are many police manuals, I will mainly focus on the Inbau, Reid, Buckley, and Jayne (2001) manual, because their manual is commonly used by police and military interrogators and hence is so influential (Gudjonsson, 2003).

3 Peer review is a crucial part of scientific writing. Peer review is a process whereby submitted articles are scrutinised by the editor and at least two consultants. Those consultants are scientists typically working in the same field as the author(s), and they are therefore knowledgeable about the topic of investigation and the research methods described in the paper. Most articles submitted to peer review get rejected because the editor and consultants detect some serious flaws. Those who do not get rejected typically undergo thorough revision before they are published.

4 When I refer to verbal lie detection via analysing speech in a systematic manner using the verbal veracity assessment tools discussed in Chapters 7 to 10, I will use the term speech analysis. When I refer to observing verbal cues in an unsystematic manner, I use the term observing (or paying attention to) verbal behaviour.

CHAPTER 2

Lying: A Selfish Act and a Social Lubricant

Deceiving others is part of everyday life. A man says that he is pleased with his birthday presents, although in fact they are not what he really wanted; the host receives compliments about his cooking, although the food was not really good; and a schoolgirl watching TV tells her dad that she has finished her homework, although she has not actually yet started it. Moreover, a boy insists that he hasn’t taken money from his mother’s purse; a smuggler tells the customs officer that she has nothing to declare; and a murderer denies having committed the crime. These are only a few examples from an almost inexhaustible source of possible lies.

This chapter deals with telling lies in everyday life. After defining deception, I describe the different types of lie that exist, the reasons why people lie, estimates of how often people lie, and individual differences in telling lies. This chapter demonstrates that on average we each try to dupe others more than once a day. It further shows that the role of lying in social communication is two-pronged: Sometimes it is harmful for the ones who are lied to. The world may look entirely different today, if people had been fully aware of Hitler’s real intentions before World War II broke out; if people realised that those individuals who flew airplanes into New York’s Twin Towers took flying lessons in order to fulfil just that purpose; or if people realised that those who carried out the bombings in London on 7 July 2005, in effect, led double lives prior to these attacks. However, many other lies we tell are white lies, and are harmless to those who are duped (e.g., “Of course will you soon find a new boyfriend”, “I think you are much prettier than her”, “I think you performed really well”). As this chapter reveals, these kinds of lies may even benefit the lie receivers (“targets”) and often serve as a social lubricant. I will demonstrate that lying is an important phenomenon in interpersonal relationships and we often like the company of people who lie frequently. This chapter therefore challenges the stereotypical view that “lying is always bad”.

A DEFINITION OF DECEPTION

Deception can be defined in many ways. Mitchell’s (1986, p. 3) definition in particular is remarkable. He defines deception as “a false communication that tends to benefit the communicator.” This is a broad definition and classifies many acts as deceit. For example, from this perspective some plants can lie. Bond and Robinson (1988) describe how the orchid Ophrys speculum dupes male wasps with the illusion of sexual contact. The orchid produces an odour that mimics insect sexual pheromones to attract and arouse male wasps. Males are drawn to the centre of the flower, because the colouring resembles a female wasp. In the centre of the flower the male finds thick, long hairs that resemble the hair found on a female wasp’s abdomen. The male wasp believes he has found a mate, and so a pseudo-copulation takes place. The wasp then moves on to another or chid, and the orchids are cross-pollinated in the process.