Drawings as an innovative and successful lie detection tool

Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Samantha Mann, Lara Warmelink, P. Granhag, R. Fisher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Professionals typically use verbal, nonverbal or physiological lie detection tools (Vrij, 2008). There are several drawbacks associated with such tools. First, many tools are complicated to use and it can take several months to train someone properly in their use (Vrij, 2008). Second, the actual application of such tools can be time consuming. For example, speech analyses are typically carried out on transcripts of verbal statements (Masip, Sporer, Garrido, & Herrero, 2005; Vrij, 2005), and in physiological lie detection, examinees are attached to a polygraph (Raskin & Honts, 2002), undergo electroencephalograms (EEGs, Rosenfeld, 2002) or undergo functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scanning (Spence, Farrow, Herford, Wilkinson, Zheng, & Woodruff, 2001). Third, some of the tools are expensive, both in terms of equipment (e.g. fRMI bran scanner) and in their use (recording EEGs and fMRIs). Analysing someone’s behaviour is perhaps the least complicated way to detect lies but accuracy rates based on such veracity judgements tend to be low (Bond & DePaulo, 2006; Vrij, 2008; Vrij, Mann, Fisher, & Kristen, 2007).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)587-594
Number of pages8
JournalApplied Cognitive Psychology
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - May 2010


Dive into the research topics of 'Drawings as an innovative and successful lie detection tool'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this