Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:52:27.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Appendices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2016

Edited by
Jan-Willem van Prooijen  and
Paul A. M. van Lange
Jan-Willem van Prooijen
Affiliation:
VU University Amsterdam
Paul A. M. van Lange
Affiliation:
VU University Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Cheating, Corruption, and Concealment
The Roots of Dishonesty
 , pp. 303 - 310
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ansarra, R., Colwell, K., Hiscock-Anisman, C., Hines, A., Fleck, R., Cole, L., & Belarde, D. (2011). Augmenting ACID with affective details to assess credibility. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 3, 141–158. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_11.Google Scholar
Bembibre, J., & Higueras, L. (2011). Differential effectiveness of the cognitive interview in a simulation of a testimony. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 17, 473–489. DOI: 10.1080/10683160903321540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bembibre, J., & Higueras, L. (2012). Comparative analysis of true and false statements with the source monitoring model and the cognitive interview: Special features of the false accusation of innocent people. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 18, 913–928. DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.589387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogaard, G., Meijer, E. H., & Vrij, A. (2014). Using an example statement increases information but does not increase accuracy of CBCA, RM, and SCAN. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 11, 151–163. DOI: 10.1002/jip.1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colwell, K., Hiscock, C. K., & Memon, A. (2002). Interview techniques and the assessment of statement credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 287–300. DOI: 10.1002/acp.788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colwell, K., Hiscock-Anisman, C. K., Memon, A., Rachel, A., & Colwell, L. (2007). Vividness and spontaneity of statement detail characteristics as predictors of witness credibility. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 25, 1–26.Google Scholar
Colwell, K., Hiscock-Anisman, C. K., Memon, A., Taylor, L., & Prewett, J. (2007b). Assessment criteria indicative of deception (ACID): An integrated system of investigative interviewing and detecting deception. Journal of Investrigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 4, 167–180. DOI: 10.1002/jip.73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J. R., Michael, S. W., Meissner, C. A., & Brandon, S. E. (2013). Validating a new assessment method for deception detection: Introducing a psychologically based credibility assessment tool. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2, 33–41. DOI: 10.1016/j/jarmac.2013.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granhag, P. A., & Knieps, M. (2011). Episodic future thought: Illuminating the trademarks of forming true and false intentions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 274–280. DOI: 10.1002/acp1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez-Fernaud, E., & Alonso-Quecuty, M. (1997). The cognitive interview and lie detection: A new magnifying glass for Sherlock Holmes? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 55–68. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099–0720(199702)11:1<55::AID-ACP423>3.0.CO;2-G.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knieps, M., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2013a). Back to the future: Asking about mental images to discriminate between true and false intentions. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 147, 619–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knieps, M., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2013b). Repeated visits to the future: Asking about mental images to discriminate between true and false intentions. International Journal of Advances in Psychology, 2, 93–102.Google Scholar
Köhnken, G., Schimossek, E., Aschermann, E., & Höfer, E. (1995). The cognitive interview and the assessment of the credibility of adult’s statements. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 671–684. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.80.6.671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, G. L. J., Vrij, A., Hope, L., & Waller, B. (2012). Sorting the liars from the truth tellers: The benefits of asking unanticipated questions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 107–114. DOI: 10.1002/acp.2879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leins, D., Fisher, R., & Vrij, A. (2012). Drawing on liars’ lack of cognitive flexibility: Detecting deception through varying report modes. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 601–607. DOI: 10.1002/acp.2837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leins, D., Fisher, R. P., Vrij, A., Leal, S., & Mann, S. (2011). Using sketch-drawing to induce inconsistency in liars. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16, 253–265. DOI 10.1348/135532510X501775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leal, S., Vrij, A., Warmelink, L., Vernham, Z., & Fisher, R. (2015). You cannot hide your telephone lies: Providing a model statement as an aid to detect deception in insurance telephone calls. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 20, 129–146. DOI: 10.1111/lcrp.12017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, M., Granhag, P. A., Landström, S., Roos af Hjelmsäter, E., Strömwall, L. A., & Vrij, A. (2010). “Can you remember what was in your pocket when you were stung by a bee?” – Eliciting cues to deception by asking the unanticipated. Open Criminology Journal, 3, 31–36.Google Scholar
Mac Giolla, E., & Granhag, P. A. (2015). Detecting false intent among small cells of suspects: Single versus repeated interviews. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 12, 142–157. DOI: 10.1002/jip.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, S., Vrij, A., Shaw, D., Leal, S., Ewans, S., Hillman, J., Granhag, P. A., & Fisher, R. P. (2013). Two heads are better than one? How to effectively use two interviewers to elicit cues to deception. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18, 324–340. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02055.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memon, A., Fraser, J., Colwell, K., Odinot, G., & Mastroberardino, S. (2010). Distinguishing truthful from invented accounts using reality monitoring criteria. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15, 177–194. DOI: 10.1348/135532508X401382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, C. A. III, Colwell, K., & Hzalett, G. (2011). Efficacy of forensic statement analysis in distinguishing truthful from deceptive eyewitness accounts of highly stressful events. Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, 56, 1227–1234. DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01896.x.Google ScholarPubMed
Parker, A. D., & Brown, J. (2000). Detection of deception: Statement validity analysis as a means of determining truthfulness or falsity of rape allegations. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 5, 237–259. DOI: 10.1348/135532500168119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roos af Hjelmsäter, E., Öhman, L., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2014). Mapping deception in adolescents: Eliciting cues to deceit through an unanticipated spatial drawing task. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19, 179–188. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02068.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, D. J., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., & Hillman, J. (2013). Expect the unexpected? Variations in question type elicit cues to deception in joint interviewer contexts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 336–343. DOI: 10.1002/acp.2911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sooniste, T., Granhag, P. A., Knieps, M., & Vrij, A. (2013). True and false intentions: Asking about the past to detect lies about the future. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 19, 673–685. DOI: 10.1080/1068316x.2013.793333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sooniste, T., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Vrij, A. (in press). Discriminating between true and false intent among small cells of suspects. Legal and Criminological Psychology. DOI: 10.1111/lcrp.12063.Google Scholar
Suckle-Nelson, J. A., Colwell, K., Hiscock-Anisman, C., Florence, S., Youschak, K. E., & Duarte, A. (2010). Assessment criteria indicative of deception (ACID): Replication and gender differences. The Open Criminology Journal, 3, 23–30.Google Scholar
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Hillman, J., & Sperry, K. (2009). Outsmarting the liars: The benefit of asking unanticipated questions. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 159–166. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9143-y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., & Fisher, R. (2012). Imposing cognitive load to elicit cues to deceit: Inducing the reverse order technique naturally. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 18, 579–594. DOI: 10.1080/10683160902776843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., & Granhag, P. A. (2011). A comparison between lying about intentions and past activities: Verbal cues and detection accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 212–218. DOI: 10.1002/acp.1665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Warmelink, L., Granhag, P. A., & Fisher, R. P. (2010). Drawings as an innovative and successful lie detection tool. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 587–594. DOI: 10.1002/acp/1627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Mann, S., Fisher, R., Leal, S., Milne, B., & Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 253–265. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-007-9103-y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., & Fisher, R. (2010). “Look into my eyes”: Can an instruction to maintain eye contact facilitate lie detection? Psychology, Crime, & Law, 16, 327–348. DOI: 10.1080/10683160902776843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., & Fisher, R. (2012). Is anyone out there? Drawings as a tool to detect deception in occupations interviews. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 18, 377–388. DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2010.498422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Jundi, S., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). Have you been there before? The effect of experience and question expectedness on lying about intentions. Acta Psychologica, 141, 178–183. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.07.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, L. A., Veinott, E. S., Meissner, C. M., Fallon, C., & Mueller, S. T. (2010). Field Training and Testing of Interview and Elicitation Methods (Final Report prepared under Contract W91CRB-09-C-0082 for US ARMY REDCOM Acquisition Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD). Fairborn, OH: Klein Associates Division of Applied Research Associates.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×