Interviewing to detect deception

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4951 Downloads (Pure)


DePaulo et al.’s (2003) meta-analysis of verbal and nonverbal cues to deception showed that cues to deception are faint and unreliable. If liars do not spontaneously display diagnostic cues to deceit, a logical step is to make sure that investigators elicit or enhance such cues in interviews through specific interview technique. Such interview techniques were scarce in the nonverbal and verbal cues to deception domain, but recently researchers have developed alternative protocols that have their roots in cognition and are based on the assumption that questions can be asked that are more difficult for liars to answer than for truth tellers. They will be discussed in the first part of this article. Traditionally, lie detection in a forensic context concentrated on police-suspect interview settings. However, in the wake of high-profile international terrorist attacks, the importance of identifying terrorist networks and gathering intelligence about the activities of such groups has become paramount. Deception detection in intelligence interviews differs in several ways from deception detection in traditional police-suspect interviews and requires innovative deception research. In the second part of this article we discuss the emerging literature in this domain.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)184-194
JournalEuropean Psychologist
Issue number3
Early online date1 Jan 2014
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2014


Dive into the research topics of 'Interviewing to detect deception'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this