Cargando…
Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future
This article provides an overview of verbal lie detection research. This type of research began in the 1970s with examining the relationship between deception and specific words. We briefly review this initial research. In the late 1980s, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) emerged, a veracity as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9775025/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36552104 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12121644 |
_version_ | 1784855542411296768 |
---|---|
author | Vrij, Aldert Granhag, Pär Anders Ashkenazi, Tzachi Ganis, Giorgio Leal, Sharon Fisher, Ronald P. |
author_facet | Vrij, Aldert Granhag, Pär Anders Ashkenazi, Tzachi Ganis, Giorgio Leal, Sharon Fisher, Ronald P. |
author_sort | Vrij, Aldert |
collection | PubMed |
description | This article provides an overview of verbal lie detection research. This type of research began in the 1970s with examining the relationship between deception and specific words. We briefly review this initial research. In the late 1980s, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) emerged, a veracity assessment tool containing a list of verbal criteria. This was followed by Reality Monitoring (RM) and Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), two other veracity assessment tools that contain lists of verbal criteria. We discuss their contents, theoretical rationales, and ability to identify truths and lies. We also discuss similarities and differences between CBCA, RM, and SCAN. In the mid 2000s, ‘Interviewing to deception’ emerged, with the goal of developing specific interview protocols aimed at enhancing or eliciting verbal veracity cues. We outline the four most widely researched interview protocols to date: the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), Verifiability Approach (VA), Cognitive Credibility Assessment (CCA), and Reality Interviewing (RI). We briefly discuss the working of these protocols, their theoretical rationales and empirical support, as well as the similarities and differences between them. We conclude this article with elaborating on how neuroscientists can inform and improve verbal lie detection. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9775025 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97750252022-12-23 Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future Vrij, Aldert Granhag, Pär Anders Ashkenazi, Tzachi Ganis, Giorgio Leal, Sharon Fisher, Ronald P. Brain Sci Article This article provides an overview of verbal lie detection research. This type of research began in the 1970s with examining the relationship between deception and specific words. We briefly review this initial research. In the late 1980s, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) emerged, a veracity assessment tool containing a list of verbal criteria. This was followed by Reality Monitoring (RM) and Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), two other veracity assessment tools that contain lists of verbal criteria. We discuss their contents, theoretical rationales, and ability to identify truths and lies. We also discuss similarities and differences between CBCA, RM, and SCAN. In the mid 2000s, ‘Interviewing to deception’ emerged, with the goal of developing specific interview protocols aimed at enhancing or eliciting verbal veracity cues. We outline the four most widely researched interview protocols to date: the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE), Verifiability Approach (VA), Cognitive Credibility Assessment (CCA), and Reality Interviewing (RI). We briefly discuss the working of these protocols, their theoretical rationales and empirical support, as well as the similarities and differences between them. We conclude this article with elaborating on how neuroscientists can inform and improve verbal lie detection. MDPI 2022-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9775025/ /pubmed/36552104 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12121644 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Vrij, Aldert Granhag, Pär Anders Ashkenazi, Tzachi Ganis, Giorgio Leal, Sharon Fisher, Ronald P. Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title | Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title_full | Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title_fullStr | Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title_full_unstemmed | Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title_short | Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future |
title_sort | verbal lie detection: its past, present and future |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9775025/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36552104 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12121644 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vrijaldert verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture AT granhagparanders verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture AT ashkenazitzachi verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture AT ganisgiorgio verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture AT lealsharon verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture AT fisherronaldp verballiedetectionitspastpresentandfuture |