Guidelines to catch a liar

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490071.013

13 - Guidelines to catch a liar

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009

Aldert Vrij

Edited by

Pär Anders Granhag and

Leif A. Strömwall

Show author details

Aldert Vrij: Affiliation:
University of Portsmouth, UK
Pär Anders Granhag: Affiliation:
Göteborgs Universitet, Sweden
Leif A. Strömwall: Affiliation:
Göteborgs Universitet, Sweden

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A Warning

The guidelines which will be presented in this chapter are based upon psychological principles and research regarding deception and lie detection (I will use the words ‘lying’ and ‘deception’ interchangeably throughout this chapter). Most studies are conducted in university laboratory situations where people are asked to lie for the sake of the experiment. This might be seen as a serious limitation, as lying for the sake of the experiment might well be totally different from lying in police interviews. This issue will be addressed throughout the guidelines where relevant.

Introduction

Research has convincingly demonstrated that catching liars is a difficult task and that people, including professional lie-catchers, frequently make mistakes when they attempt to detect deceit (Vrij, 2000a). In scientific studies concerning the detection of deception, observers are typically given videotaped or audiotaped statements of a number of people who are either lying or telling the truth. After each statement, observers (typically college students) are asked to judge whether the statement is truthful or false. In such tasks, guessing whether someone is lying or not gives a 50 per cent chance of being correct. Vrij (2000a) has reviewed thirty-seven lie-detection studies in which the observers were college students. The total accuracy rate, the percentage of correct answers, was 56.6 per cent, which is only just about the level of chance.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts , pp. 287 - 314

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490071.013 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2004

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

Akehurst, L., Köhnken, G., Vrij, A., and Bull, R. (1996). Lay persons' and police officers' beliefs regarding deceptive behaviour. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 461–733.0.CO;2-2>CrossRef Google Scholar

Akehurst, L., and Vrij, A. (1999). Creating suspects in police interviews. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 192–210CrossRef Google Scholar

Anderson, D. E., DePaulo, B. M., Ansfield, M. E., Tickle, J. J., and Green, E. (1999). Beliefs about cues to deception: Mindless stereotypes or untapped wisdom?Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 23, 67–89CrossRef Google Scholar

Aune, R., Levine, T., Ching, P., and Yoshimoto, J. (1993). The influence of perceived source reward on attributions of deception. Communication Research Reports, 10, 15–27CrossRef Google Scholar

Bagley, J., and Manelis, L. (1979). Effect of awareness of an indicator of cognitive load. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 591–4CrossRef Google Scholar

Baldry, A. C., Winkel, F. W., and Enthoven, D. S. (1997). Paralinguistic and nonverbal triggers of biased credibility assessments of rape victims in Dutch police officers: An experimental study of ‘Nonevidentiary’ bias. In S. Redondo, V. Garrido, J. Perze, and R. Barbaret (eds.), Advances in psychology and law (pp. 163–74). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRef

Bargh, J. A., and Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462–79CrossRef Google Scholar

Bauer, L. O., Strock, B. D., Goldstein, R., Stern, J. A., and Walrath, L. C. (1985). Auditory discrimination and the eyeblink. Psychophysiology, 22, 629–35CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bond, C. F., and Fahey, W. E. (1987). False suspicion and the misperception of deceit. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 41–6CrossRef Google Scholar

Brandt, D. R., Miller, G. R., and Hocking, J. E. (1980a). The truth-deception attribution: Effects of familiarity on the ability of observers to detect deception. Human Communication Research, 6, 99–110CrossRef Google Scholar

Brandt, D. R., Miller, G. R., and Hocking, J. E. (1980b). Effects of self-monitoring and familiarity on deception detection. Communication Quarterly, 28, 3–10CrossRef Google Scholar

Brandt, D. R., Miller, G. R., and Hocking, J. E. (1982). Familiarity and lie detection: A replication and extension. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46, 276–90CrossRef Google Scholar

Brown, R. (1995). Prejudice: Its social psychology. Cambridge: Blackwell

Bull, R., and Vine, M. (2003). Are judgements of who is lying influenced by their facial attractiveness? Manuscript in preparation

Buller, D. B., and Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6, 203–42CrossRef Google Scholar

Buller, D. B., Stiff, J. B., and Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Behavioral adaptation in deceptive transactions: Fact or fiction. Reply to Levine and McCornack. Human Communication Research, 22, 589–603CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgess, A. W. (1985). Rape and sexual assault: A research book. London: Garland

Burgess, A. W., and Homstrom, L. L. (1974). Rape: Victims of crisis. Bowie: Brady

Burgoon, J. K., and Buller, D. B. (1994). Interpersonal deception, III: Effects of deceit on perceived communication and nonverbal dynamics. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18, 155–84CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., Dillman, L., and Walther, J. B. (1995). Interpersonal deception, IV: Effects of suspicion on perceived communication and nonverbal behaviour dynamics. Human Communication Research, 22, 163–96CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., Ebesu, A. S., White, C. H., and Rockwell, P. A. (1996). Testing interpersonal deception theory: Effects of suspicion on communication behaviors and perception. Communication Theory, 6, 243–67CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., Floyd, K., and Grandpre, J. (1996). Deceptive realities: Sender, receiver, and observer perspectives in deceptive conversations. Communication Research, 23, 724–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., and Guerrero, L. K. (1995). Interpersonal deception, IX: Effects of social skill and nonverbal communication on deception success and detection accuracy. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 289–311CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., White, C. H., Afifi, W., and Buslig, A. L. S. (1999). The role of conversation involvement in deceptive interpersonal interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 669–85CrossRef Google Scholar

Chartrand, T. L., and Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Colwell, K., Hiscock, C. K., and Memon, A. (2002). Interviewing techniques and the assessment of statement credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 287–300CrossRef Google Scholar

Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph (2003). The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, DC: National Academies Press

Davis, M., and Hadiks, D. (1995). Demeanor and credibility. Semiotica, 106, 5–54CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M. (1992). Nonverbal behavior and self-presentation. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 203–43CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

DePaulo, B. M. (1994). Spotting lies: Can humans learn to do better?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3, 83–6CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M., and Friedman, H. S. (1998). Nonverbal communication. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 3–40). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill

DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., and Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979–95CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

DePaulo, B. M., and Kirkendol, S. E. (1989). The motivational impairment effect in the communication of deception. In J. C. Yuille (ed.), Credibility assessment (pp. 51–70). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer AcademicCrossRef

DePaulo, B. M., Kirkendol, S. E., Tang, J., and Brien, T. P. (1988). The motivational impairment effect in the communication of deception: Replications and extensions. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 12, 177–201CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M., Lanier, K., and Davis, T. (1983). Detecting the deceit of the motivated liar. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1096–103CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M., LeMay, C. S., and Epstein, J. A. (1991). Effects of importance of success and expectations for success on effectiveness at deceiving. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 14–24CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. L., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., and Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–118CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

DePaulo, B. M., and Pfeifer, R. L. (1986). On-the-job experience and skill at detecting deception. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 249–67CrossRef Google Scholar

DePaulo, B. M., Stone, J. L., and Lassiter, G. D. (1985a). Deceiving and detecting deceit. In B. R. Schenkler (ed.), The self and social life (pp. 323–70). New York: McGraw-Hill

DePaulo, B. M., Stone, J. I., and Lassiter, G. D. (1985b). Telling ingratiating lies: Effects of target sex and target attractiveness on verbal and nonverbal deceptive success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1191–203CrossRef Google Scholar

Ekman, P. (1985). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics and marriage. New York: Norton

Ekman, P., and Frank, M. G. (1993). Lies that fail. In M. Lewis and C. Saarni (eds.), Lying and deception in everyday life (pp. 184–201). New York, NJ: Guilford Publications

Ekman, P., and Friesen, W. V. (1972). Hand movements. Journal of Communication, 22, 353–74CrossRef Google Scholar

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., and Scherer, K. R. (1976). Body movement and voice pitch in deceptive interaction. Semiotica, 16, 23–7CrossRef Google Scholar

Ekman, P., and O'Sullivan, M. (1989). Hazards in detecting deceit. In D. C. Raskin (ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence. New York: Springer

Ekman, P., and Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar?American Psychologist, 46, 913–20CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ekman, P., Sullivan, M., and Frank, M. G. (1999). A few can catch a liar. Psychological Science, 10, 263–6CrossRef Google Scholar

Ekman, P., Sullivan, M., Friesen, W. V., and Scherer, K. (1991). Face, voice, and body in detecting deceit. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 15, 125–35CrossRef Google Scholar

Feeley, T. H., Turck, M. A., and Young, M. J. (1995). Baseline familiarity in lie detection. Communication Research Reports, 12, 160–9CrossRef Google Scholar

Feeley, T. H., and Young, M. J. (2000). The effects of cognitive capacity on beliefs about deceptive communication. Communication Quarterly, 48, 101–19CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, R. P., Brennan, K. H., and McCauley, M. R. (2002). The cognitive interview method to enhance eyewitness recall. In M. L. Eisen, J. A. Quas, and G. S. Goodman (eds.), Memory and suggestibility in the forensic interview (pp. 265–86). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Fisher, R. P., and Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas

Frank, M. G., and Ekman, P. (1997). The ability to detect deceit generalizes across different types of high-stake lies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1429–39CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gordon, N. J., Fleisher, W. L., and Weinberg, C. D. (2002). Effective interviewing and interrogation techniques. San Diego, CA: Academic Press

Granhag, P. A., and Strömwall, L. A. (2002). Repeated interrogations: Verbal and nonverbal cues to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 243–57CrossRef Google Scholar

Gudjonsson, G. H. (1992). The psychology of interrogations, confessions and testimony. Chichester, England: Wiley

Harrigan, J. A., and Connell, D. M. (1996). Facial movements during anxiety states. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 205–12CrossRef Google Scholar

Hernandez-Fernaud, E., and Alonso-Quecuty, M. (1997). The Cognitive Interview and lie detection: A new magnifying glass for Sherlock Holmes?Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 55–683.0.CO;2-G>CrossRef Google Scholar

Hess, J. E. (1997). Interviewing and interrogation for law enforcement. Reading, UK: Anderson Publishing

Hirsch, A., and Wolf, C. J. (2001). Practical methods for detecting mendacity: A case study. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 29, 438–44Google Scholar PubMed

Hocking, J. E., and Leathers, D. G. (1980). Nonverbal indicators of deception: A new theoretical perspective. Communication Monographs, 47, 119–131CrossRef Google Scholar

Horvath, F., Jayne, B., and Buckley, J. (1994). Differentiation of truthful and deceptive criminal suspects in behavior analysis interviews. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 39, 793–807CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Iacono, W. G., and Lykken, D. T. (1997). The validity of the lie detector: Two surveys of scientific opinion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 426–33CrossRef Google Scholar

Iacono, W. G., and Patrick, C. J. (1997). Polygraphy and integrity testing. In R. Rogers (ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception. 2nd edn (pp. 252–81). New York: Guilford Publications

Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., and Buckley, J. P. (1986). Criminal interrogation and confessions (3rd edn). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins

Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., and Jayne, B. C. (2001). Criminal interrogation and confessions (4th edn). Gaithersburg, MA: Aspen Publishers

Johnson, M. K., and Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality Monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67–85CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, M. K., and Raye, C. L. (1998). False memories and confabulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 137–45CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kleiner, M. (ed.). (2002). Handbook of polygraph testing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press

Köhnken, G. (1987). Training police officers to detect deceptive eyewitness statements. Does it work?Social Behaviour, 2, 1–17Google Scholar

Krauss, R. M. (1981). Impression formation, impression management, and nonverbal behaviors. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (eds.), Social cognition: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. I (pp. 323–41). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

LaFrance, M., and Mayo, C. (1976). Racial differences in gaze behaviour during conversations: Two systematic observational studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 547–52CrossRef Google Scholar

Lane, J. D., and DePaulo, B. M. (1999). Completing Coyne's cycle: Dysphorics' ability to detect deception. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 311–29CrossRef Google Scholar

Levine, T. R., and McCornack, S. A. (1992). Linking love and lies: A formal test of the McCornack and Parks model of deception detection. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 9, 143–54CrossRef Google Scholar

Levine, T. R., McCornack, S. A., and Park, H. S. (1999). Accuracy in detecting truths and lies: Documenting the ‘veracity effect’. Communication Monographs, 66, 125–44CrossRef Google Scholar

Littmann, E., and Szewczyk, H. (1983). Zu einigen Kriterien und Ergebnissen forensisch-psychologischer Glaubwürdigkeitsbegutachtung von sexuell misbrauchten Kindern und Jugendlichen. Forensia, 4, 55–72Google Scholar

MacLaren, V. V. (2001). A quantitative review of the Guilty Knowledge Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 674–83CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mann, S., Vrij, A., and Bull, R. (2002). Suspects, lies and videotape: An analysis of authentic high-stakes liars. Law and Human Behaviour, 26, 365–76CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mann, S., Vrij, A., and Bull, R. (2004). Detecting true lies: Police officers' ability to detect suspects' lies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 137–49CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Meissner, C. A., and Kassin, S. M. (2002). ‘He's guilty!’: Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 469–80CrossRef Google Scholar

Miller, G. R., and Stiff, J. B. (1993). Deceptive communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Moston, S., and Engelberg, T. (1993). Police questioning techniques in tape recorded interviews with criminal suspects. Policing and Society, 3, 223–37CrossRef Google Scholar

Ofshe, R. J., and Leo, R. A. (1997). The decision to confess falsely: Rational choice and irrational action. Denver University Law Review, 74, 979–1112Google Scholar

Pavlidis, J., Eberhardt, N. L., and Levine, J. A. (2002). Seeing through the face of deception. Nature, 415, 35Google Scholar PubMed

Pearse, J., and Gudjonsson, G. (1996). Police interviewing techniques of two south London police stations. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 3, 63–74CrossRef Google Scholar

Porter, S., Woodworth, M., and Birt, A, R. (2000). Truth, lies, and videotape: An investigation of the ability of federal parole officers to detect deception. Law and Human Behaviour, 24, 643–58CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Raskin, D. C. (1989). Polygraph techniques for the detection of deception. In D. C. Raskin (ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence (pp. 247–96). New York: Springer

Ruby, C. L., and Brigham, J. C. (1996). A criminal schema: The role of chronicity, race, and socioeconomic status in law enforcement officials' perceptions of others. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 95–112CrossRef Google Scholar

Strömwall, L. A., and Granhag, P. A. (2003). How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 9, 19–36CrossRef Google Scholar

Taylor, R., and Vrij, A. (2000). The effects of varying stake and cognitive complexity on beliefs about the cues to deception. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 3, 111–24Google Scholar

Tye, M. C., Amato, S. L., Honts, C. R., Kevitt, M. K., and Peters, D. (1999). The willingness of children to lie and the assessment of credibility in an ecologically relevant laboratory setting. Applied Developmental Science, 3, 92–109CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A. (1993). Credibility judgments of detectives: The impact of nonverbal behavior, social skills and physical characteristics on impression formation. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 601–11CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A. (1995). Behavioral correlates of deception in a simulated police interview. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 129, 15–29CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A. (2000a). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and its implications for professional practice. Chichester: John Wiley

Vrij, A. (2000b). Telling and detecting lies as a function of raising the stakes. In C. M. Breur, M. M. Kommer, J. F. Nijboer, and J. M. Reintjes (eds.), New trends in criminal investigation and evidence II (pp. 699–709). Antwerpen, Belgium: Intersentia

Vrij, A. (2001). Liegen en het ontmaskeren van leugenaars: Leugens en waarheden over de polygraaf. In M. Bockstaele (ed.), De Polygraaf (pp. 11–33). Uitgeverij Politeia

Vrij, A. (in press). Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., and Bull, R. (2002). Will the truth come out? The effect of deception, age, status, coaching, and social skills on CBCA scores. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 261–83CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., and Bull, R. (2004). Detecting deceit via analyses of verbal and nonverbal behavior in children and adults. Human Communication Research, 30, 8–41CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Dragt, A. W., and Koppelaar, L. (1992). Interviews with ethnic interviewees: Nonverbal communication errors in impression formation. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 2, 199–209CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Edward, K., and Bull, R. (2001a). Police officers' ability to detect deceit: The benefit of indirect deception detection measures. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 6, 2, 185–97CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Edward, K., and Bull, R. (2001b). Stereotypical verbal and nonverbal responses while deceiving others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 899–909CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Edward, K., Roberts, K. P., and Bull, R. (2000). Detecting deceit via analysis of verbal and nonverbal behaviour. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 24, 239–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Fischer, A. (1995). The expression of emotions in simulated rape interviews. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 10, 64–7CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Harden, F., Terry, J., Edward, K., and Bull, R. (2001). The influence of personal characteristics, stakes and lie complexity on the accuracy and confidence to detect deceit. In R. Roesch, R. R. Corrado, and R. J. Dempster (eds.), Psychology in the courts: International advances in knowledge (pp. 289–304). London: Routledge

Vrij, A., and Heaven, S. (1999). Vocal and verbal indicators of deception as a function of lie complexity. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 4, 401–13Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Lochun, S. (1997). Neuro-linguistic programming and the police: Worthwhile or not?Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 12, 25–31CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Mann, S. (2001a). Telling and detecting lies in a high-stake situation: The case of a convicted murderer. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15, 187–2033.0.CO;2-A>CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Mann, S. (2001b). Who killed my relative? Police officers' ability to detect real-life high-stake lies. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 7, 119–32CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Mann, S. (2003). Telling and detecting true lies: Investigating and detecting the lies of murderers and thieves during police interviews. In M. Verhallen, G. Verkaeke, P. J. van Koppen, and J. Goethals (eds.), Much ado about crime: Chapters on psychology and law (pp. 185–208). Brussels: Uitgeverij Politeia

Vrij, A., and Mann, S. (2004). Detecting deception: The benefit of looking at a combination of behavioral, auditory and speech content related cues in a systematic manner. Group Decision and Negotiations, 13, 61–79CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Semin, G. R. (1996). Lie experts' beliefs about nonverbal indicators of deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 20, 65–80CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Taylor, R. (2003). Police officers' and students' beliefs about telling and detecting little and serious lies. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 5, 1–9Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Winkel, F. W. (1991). Cultural patterns in Dutch and Surinam nonverbal behaviour: An analysis of simulated police/citizen encounters. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 15, 169–84CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Winkel, F. W. (1992). Social skills, distorted perception and being suspect: Studies in impression formation and the ability to deceive. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 8, 2–6CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., and Winkel, F. W. (1994). Perceptual distortions in cross-cultural interrogations: The impact of skin color, accent, speech style and spoken fluency on impression formation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 284–96CrossRef Google Scholar

Vrij, A., Winkel, F. W., and Koppelaar, L. (1991). Interactie tussen politiefunctionarissen en allochtone burgers: twee studies naar de frequentie en het effect van aan- en wegkijken op de impressieformatie. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie, 46, 8–20Google Scholar

Vrij, J. (2001). Verzet tegen angst. Kontakt door Aantreden, 56, 4Google Scholar

Wallbott, H. G., and Scherer, K. R. (1991). Stress specifics: Differential effects of coping style, gender, and type of stressor on automatic arousal, facial expression, and subjective feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 147–56CrossRef Google Scholar

Wiseman, R. (1995). The megalab truth test. Nature, 373, 391CrossRef Google Scholar

Yeschke, C. L. (1997). The art of investigative interviewing: A human approach to testimonial evidence. Boston, MA: Butterworth Heinemann

Zaparniuk, J., Yuille, J. C., and Taylor, S. (1995). Assessing the credibility of true and false statements. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 18, 343–52CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., and Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. XIV (1–57). New York, NJ: Academic PressCrossRef

Zulawski, D. E., and Wicklander, D. E. (1993). Practical aspects of interview and interrogation. Boca Raton: CRC Press

Book contents

13 - Guidelines to catch a liar

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive