TY - JOUR
T1 - Problems in expert deception detection and the risk of false confessions
T2 - no proof to the contrary in Levine et al. (2014)
AU - Vrij, Aldert
AU - Meissner, Christian A.
AU - Kassin, Saul M.
N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Psychology, Crime & Law on 2015, available online: http://wwww.tandfonline.com/10.1080/1068316X.2015.1054389
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Lie detection research has shown that observers who rely on nonverbal cues or on verbal cues correctly classify on average 54% of truth tellers and liars. In addition, over the years, countless numbers of innocent people have made false confessions and, in analysing the problem, researchers have implicated both a suspect's vulnerability and the persuasive influence of certain police interrogation tactics. Levine et al. (2014) aim to contribute to these vast bodies of literature by reporting two studies purportedly showing that expert interviewers - when they are permitted to question interviewees - can achieve almost perfect accuracy without eliciting false confessions. We argue that theoretical and methodological aspects of these studies undermine the reliability and validity of the data reported, that as a result the studies do not contribute to the scientific literatures on lie detection and false confessions in any meaningful way, and that the results are dangerously misleading.
AB - Lie detection research has shown that observers who rely on nonverbal cues or on verbal cues correctly classify on average 54% of truth tellers and liars. In addition, over the years, countless numbers of innocent people have made false confessions and, in analysing the problem, researchers have implicated both a suspect's vulnerability and the persuasive influence of certain police interrogation tactics. Levine et al. (2014) aim to contribute to these vast bodies of literature by reporting two studies purportedly showing that expert interviewers - when they are permitted to question interviewees - can achieve almost perfect accuracy without eliciting false confessions. We argue that theoretical and methodological aspects of these studies undermine the reliability and validity of the data reported, that as a result the studies do not contribute to the scientific literatures on lie detection and false confessions in any meaningful way, and that the results are dangerously misleading.
KW - WNU
U2 - 10.1080/1068316X.2015.1054389
DO - 10.1080/1068316X.2015.1054389
M3 - Article
SN - 1068-316X
SP - 1
EP - 19
JO - Psychology, Crime & Law
JF - Psychology, Crime & Law
ER -