Vincent Denault, P. Plusquellec, L. M. Jupe, Michel St-Yves, Norah E. Dunbar, Maria Hartwig, S. Sporer, Jessica Rioux-Turcotte, Jonathan Jarry, D. Walsh, H. Otgaar, Andrei Viziteu, V. Talwar, D. Keatley, Iris Blandón-Gitlin, Clint Townson, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin, S. Lilienfeld, M. Patterson, Igor Areh, A. Allan, Hilary Evans Cameron, R. Boivin, L. Brinke, Jaume Masip, R. Bull, M. Cyr, Lorraine Hope, Leif A. Strömwall, Stephanie Bennett, Faisal Al Menaiya, R. Leo, Annelies Vredeveldt, Marty Laforest, C. Honts, A. L. Manzanero, S. Mann, P. Granhag, K. Ask, F. Gabbert, J. Guay, Alexandre Coutant, Jeffrey T. Hancock, V. Manusov, J. Burgoon, Steven M Kleinman, Gordon Wright, S. Landström, I. Freckelton, Zarah Vernham, P. J. Koppen
{"title":"非言语交际分析:安全与司法语境中的伪科学危险","authors":"Vincent Denault, P. Plusquellec, L. M. Jupe, Michel St-Yves, Norah E. Dunbar, Maria Hartwig, S. Sporer, Jessica Rioux-Turcotte, Jonathan Jarry, D. Walsh, H. Otgaar, Andrei Viziteu, V. Talwar, D. Keatley, Iris Blandón-Gitlin, Clint Townson, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin, S. Lilienfeld, M. Patterson, Igor Areh, A. Allan, Hilary Evans Cameron, R. Boivin, L. Brinke, Jaume Masip, R. Bull, M. Cyr, Lorraine Hope, Leif A. Strömwall, Stephanie Bennett, Faisal Al Menaiya, R. Leo, Annelies Vredeveldt, Marty Laforest, C. Honts, A. L. Manzanero, S. Mann, P. Granhag, K. Ask, F. Gabbert, J. Guay, Alexandre Coutant, Jeffrey T. Hancock, V. Manusov, J. Burgoon, Steven M Kleinman, Gordon Wright, S. Landström, I. Freckelton, Zarah Vernham, P. J. Koppen","doi":"10.5093/APJ2019A9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices.","PeriodicalId":44109,"journal":{"name":"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Analysis of Nonverbal Communication: The Dangers of Pseudoscience in Security and Justice Contexts\",\"authors\":\"Vincent Denault, P. Plusquellec, L. M. Jupe, Michel St-Yves, Norah E. Dunbar, Maria Hartwig, S. Sporer, Jessica Rioux-Turcotte, Jonathan Jarry, D. Walsh, H. Otgaar, Andrei Viziteu, V. Talwar, D. Keatley, Iris Blandón-Gitlin, Clint Townson, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin, S. Lilienfeld, M. Patterson, Igor Areh, A. Allan, Hilary Evans Cameron, R. Boivin, L. Brinke, Jaume Masip, R. Bull, M. Cyr, Lorraine Hope, Leif A. Strömwall, Stephanie Bennett, Faisal Al Menaiya, R. Leo, Annelies Vredeveldt, Marty Laforest, C. Honts, A. L. Manzanero, S. Mann, P. Granhag, K. Ask, F. Gabbert, J. Guay, Alexandre Coutant, Jeffrey T. Hancock, V. Manusov, J. Burgoon, Steven M Kleinman, Gordon Wright, S. Landström, I. Freckelton, Zarah Vernham, P. J. Koppen\",\"doi\":\"10.5093/APJ2019A9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5093/APJ2019A9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anuario De Psicologia Juridica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5093/APJ2019A9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Analysis of Nonverbal Communication: The Dangers of Pseudoscience in Security and Justice Contexts
For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices.