Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews

Aldert Vrij; Sharon Leal; Ronald P. Fisher; Samantha Mann; Eunkyung Jo; Alla Shaboltas; Maria Khaleeva; Juliana Granskaya; Kate Houston

doi:10.1002/acp.3566

Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews

Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Ronald P. Fisher, Samantha Mann, Eunkyung Jo, Alla Shaboltas, Maria Khaleeva, Juliana Granskaya, Kate Houston

International Centre for Research in Forensic Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

239 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Since interviewees typically say less when an interpreter is present, we examined whether this was caused by interpreters not interpreting everything interviewees says or by interviewees providing less information. We further examined (1) the effect of a model drawing on providing information and (2) the diagnostic value of total details and the proportion of complications as cues to deceit.

Hispanic, Russian, and South Korean participants were interviewed by native interviewers or by a British interviewer through an interpreter. Truth tellers discussed a trip they had made; liars fabricated a story. Participants received no instruction (condition 1) or were instructed to sketch while narrating without (condition 2) or with (condition 3) being given examples of detailed sketches.

Interviewees said less when an interpreter was present because they provided less information. Truth tellers gave more details and, particularly, obtained a higher proportion of complications than liars. The Sketching manipulation had no effect.

Original language	English
Journal	Applied Cognitive Psychology
Early online date	6 May 2019
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3566
Publication status	Early online - 6 May 2019

Access to Document

10.1002/acp.3566

Eliciting Information and Cues
This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Vrij, A, Leal, S, Fisher, RP, et al. Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews. Appl Cognit Psychol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3566, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3566. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.
Accepted author manuscript (Post-print), 940 KB

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.3566

Cite this

@article{01d0d7922ea346f19f0de980bc65fa4f,

title = "Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews",

abstract = "Since interviewees typically say less when an interpreter is present, we examined whether this was caused by interpreters not interpreting everything interviewees says or by interviewees providing less information. We further examined (1) the effect of a model drawing on providing information and (2) the diagnostic value of total details and the proportion of complications as cues to deceit.Hispanic, Russian, and South Korean participants were interviewed by native interviewers or by a British interviewer through an interpreter. Truth tellers discussed a trip they had made; liars fabricated a story. Participants received no instruction (condition 1) or were instructed to sketch while narrating without (condition 2) or with (condition 3) being given examples of detailed sketches.Interviewees said less when an interpreter was present because they provided less information. Truth tellers gave more details and, particularly, obtained a higher proportion of complications than liars. The Sketching manipulation had no effect.",

author = "Aldert Vrij and Sharon Leal and Fisher, {Ronald P.} and Samantha Mann and Eunkyung Jo and Alla Shaboltas and Maria Khaleeva and Juliana Granskaya and Kate Houston",

year = "2019",

month = may,

day = "6",

doi = "10.1002/acp.3566",

language = "English",

journal = "Applied Cognitive Psychology",

issn = "0888-4080",

publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews

AU - Vrij, Aldert

AU - Leal, Sharon

AU - Fisher, Ronald P.

AU - Mann, Samantha

AU - Jo, Eunkyung

AU - Shaboltas, Alla

AU - Khaleeva, Maria

AU - Granskaya, Juliana

AU - Houston, Kate

PY - 2019/5/6

Y1 - 2019/5/6

N2 - Since interviewees typically say less when an interpreter is present, we examined whether this was caused by interpreters not interpreting everything interviewees says or by interviewees providing less information. We further examined (1) the effect of a model drawing on providing information and (2) the diagnostic value of total details and the proportion of complications as cues to deceit.Hispanic, Russian, and South Korean participants were interviewed by native interviewers or by a British interviewer through an interpreter. Truth tellers discussed a trip they had made; liars fabricated a story. Participants received no instruction (condition 1) or were instructed to sketch while narrating without (condition 2) or with (condition 3) being given examples of detailed sketches.Interviewees said less when an interpreter was present because they provided less information. Truth tellers gave more details and, particularly, obtained a higher proportion of complications than liars. The Sketching manipulation had no effect.

AB - Since interviewees typically say less when an interpreter is present, we examined whether this was caused by interpreters not interpreting everything interviewees says or by interviewees providing less information. We further examined (1) the effect of a model drawing on providing information and (2) the diagnostic value of total details and the proportion of complications as cues to deceit.Hispanic, Russian, and South Korean participants were interviewed by native interviewers or by a British interviewer through an interpreter. Truth tellers discussed a trip they had made; liars fabricated a story. Participants received no instruction (condition 1) or were instructed to sketch while narrating without (condition 2) or with (condition 3) being given examples of detailed sketches.Interviewees said less when an interpreter was present because they provided less information. Truth tellers gave more details and, particularly, obtained a higher proportion of complications than liars. The Sketching manipulation had no effect.

U2 - 10.1002/acp.3566

DO - 10.1002/acp.3566

M3 - Article

SN - 0888-4080

JO - Applied Cognitive Psychology

JF - Applied Cognitive Psychology

ER -

Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit through Sketching in Interpreter‐Based Interviews

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this