Does telling a story in reverse elicit cues to deceit? A replication and extension of Vrij, Leal, Mann and Fisher (2012)

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Laure Brimbal, Angela M. Jones, Elizabeth A. Quinby
{"title":"Does telling a story in reverse elicit cues to deceit? A replication and extension of Vrij, Leal, Mann and Fisher (2012)","authors":"Laure Brimbal,&nbsp;Angela M. Jones,&nbsp;Elizabeth A. Quinby","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>The reverse order recall technique has been suggested as tool to improve deception detection accuracy. We conducted a registered replication and extension of Vrij et al., 2012's two experiments, testing whether the reverse order technique increases cues to deception in liars and accuracy in lie detection.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Following Vrij et al., 2012, in Experiment 1, participants were interviewed twice—once lying and once telling the truth—about a mission they completed. In both interviews, participants recounted their experience in chronological and reverse order. We coded interviews for cues to deception according to a cognitive approach: those included in Vrij et al., 2012 (replication) and others included in research on the cognitive load approach (extension). In Experiment 2, participants read two transcripts (replication) or viewed two videos (extension) from Experiment 1 and decided whether senders were lying or telling the truth in continuous (replication) and dichotomous judgements (extension).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In Experiment 1, truth tellers were more detailed and plausible than liars. However, we failed to find the interaction between veracity and route recall reported by the original research on the replication or extensions cues. In Experiment 2, we only found an interaction between veracity and route recall for senders telling the truth on dichotomous lie detection judgement. However, this was not supported when examining overall accuracy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These findings do not provide support for the reverse order technique as a tool to improve deception detection. We suggest further theoretical development before this technique is trained to practitioners.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 1","pages":"30-53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12252","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12252","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The reverse order recall technique has been suggested as tool to improve deception detection accuracy. We conducted a registered replication and extension of Vrij et al., 2012's two experiments, testing whether the reverse order technique increases cues to deception in liars and accuracy in lie detection.

Methods

Following Vrij et al., 2012, in Experiment 1, participants were interviewed twice—once lying and once telling the truth—about a mission they completed. In both interviews, participants recounted their experience in chronological and reverse order. We coded interviews for cues to deception according to a cognitive approach: those included in Vrij et al., 2012 (replication) and others included in research on the cognitive load approach (extension). In Experiment 2, participants read two transcripts (replication) or viewed two videos (extension) from Experiment 1 and decided whether senders were lying or telling the truth in continuous (replication) and dichotomous judgements (extension).

Results

In Experiment 1, truth tellers were more detailed and plausible than liars. However, we failed to find the interaction between veracity and route recall reported by the original research on the replication or extensions cues. In Experiment 2, we only found an interaction between veracity and route recall for senders telling the truth on dichotomous lie detection judgement. However, this was not supported when examining overall accuracy.

Conclusions

These findings do not provide support for the reverse order technique as a tool to improve deception detection. We suggest further theoretical development before this technique is trained to practitioners.

Abstract Image

反向讲故事会引起欺骗线索吗?对 Vrij、Leal、Mann 和 Fisher(2012 年)研究的复制和扩展
有人建议将倒序回忆技术作为提高欺骗检测准确性的工具。我们对 Vrij 等人 2012 年的两项实验进行了注册复制和扩展,测试逆序技术是否能提高说谎者的欺骗线索以及谎言检测的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Legal and Criminological Psychology publishes original papers in all areas of psychology and law: - victimology - policing and crime detection - crime prevention - management of offenders - mental health and the law - public attitudes to law - role of the expert witness - impact of law on behaviour - interviewing and eyewitness testimony - jury decision making - deception The journal publishes papers which advance professional and scientific knowledge defined broadly as the application of psychology to law and interdisciplinary enquiry in legal and psychological fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信