5483664
| Question | Answer |
| Background | Interviews establish guilt or innocence of an arrested person - e.g. by getting them to talk about little known parts of crime Vrij → accuracy rate of 57% in detecting lies - not much above chance - but had poor mundane realism Police think they call tell if someone is lying through small body language details = e.g looking down, putting hand over face while speaking |
| Aim | To test police officers' ability to distinguish truths and lies during police interviews with suspects |
| Sample | 99 Kent Police officers ( 24 females, 75 males) mean age: 34.3 years 78 detectives 8 trainers 4 traffic officers 9 uniformed officers |
| Procedure | Asked to judge the truthfulness of suspects in real police interviews Saw video clips of 14 suspects showing their head + torso = So expression and movement was visible = 54 clips: 6 - 145 seconds long Truths/Lies backed up by other evidence Began by filling out questionnaire on their experience in detecting lies - After each clip they indicated whether they thought it was truth or lie and how confident they were in this Finally they listed all cues they had used to detect lies |
| Results | Differences between truth and lie accuracy insignificant - 66.2% and 63.6% But together are significant since they are greater than chance Experience in interviewing correlated with accuracy → Truth: 0.20 → Lies: 0.18 Most frequently used cue was gaze, second was movement → Vagueness, contradictions in stories, and fidgeting also mentioned |
| C | Good lie detectors rely more on story cues than actions |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.