Collective interviewing: the use of a model statement to differentiate between pairs of truth-tellers and pairs of liars
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
Method - Pairs of truth‐tellers visited a restaurant together, whereas pairs of liars completed a mock crime. The task for all pairs was to convince an interviewer that they were visiting a restaurant together at the time the crime was committed. Half the truth‐telling pairs and half the lying pairs were exposed to a model statement, whilst the other halves were not.
Results - Truth‐telling pairs were more detailed and showed more interactions than lying pairs, particularly in the model statement present condition.
Conclusions - Being exposed to a model statement in a collective interview magnified the differences between pairs of truth‐tellers and pairs of liars in reporting detail and interacting with one another. A model statement is simple to implement and can be applied to many real‐world investigative interviewing settings whereby the focus is on lie detection and gathering as much information as possible.
|Journal||Legal and Criminological Psychology|
|Early online date||12 Jul 2018|
|Publication status||Published - 1 Sep 2018|
- Collective interviewing - the use of a model statement
Rights statement: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Vernham, Z. , Vrij, A. and Leal, S. (2018), Collective interviewing: The use of a model statement to differentiate between pairs of truth‐tellers and pairs of liars. Leg Crim Psychol. . doi:10.1111/lcrp.12136, which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/lcrp.12136. 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), 177 KB, PDF document