Does the truth come out in the writing? Scan as a lie detection tool.

We tested the accuracy of Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), a verbal lie detection tool that is used world-wide by federal law enforcement and military agencies. Sixty-one participants were requested to write down the truth, an outright lie or a concealment lie about activities they had just completed. The statements were coded with SCAN and with another verbal lie detection tool, Reality Monitoring (RM). RM discriminated significantly between truth tellers and outright liars and between truth tellers and concealment liars, whereas SCAN did not discriminate between truth tellers and either kind of liar. Implications of the findings for the suitability of SCAN as a lie detection tool are discussed.

[1]  Maria Hartwig,et al.  The SUE-technique: The way to interview to detect deception. , 2007 .

[2]  S. Kassin,et al.  Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions , 2010 .

[3]  Eileen Fitzpatrick,et al.  Verification and Implementation of Language-Based Deception Indicators in Civil and Criminal Narratives , 2008, COLING.

[4]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Reality monitoring judgments of other people’s memories , 1989 .

[5]  M. Steller,et al.  The evaluation of the credibility of child witness statements in the German procedural system. , 1988 .

[6]  Stephen Porter,et al.  The language of deceit: An investigation of the verbal clues to deception in the interrogation context , 1996 .

[7]  S. L. Sporer,et al.  The less travelled road to truth: verbal cues in deception detection in accounts of fabricated and self‐experienced events , 1997 .

[8]  Aldert Vrij,et al.  Information-gathering vs accusatory interview style: Individual differences in respondents’ experiences , 2006 .

[9]  A. Vrij,et al.  Outsmarting the Liars: The Benefit of Asking Unanticipated Questions , 2009, Law and human behavior.

[10]  S. Porter,et al.  Pitfalls and Opportunities in Nonverbal and Verbal Lie Detection , 2010, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[11]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Interpersonal Reality Monitoring: Judging the Sources of Other People's Memories , 1998 .

[12]  Maria Hartwig,et al.  Guilty and innocent suspects’ strategies during police interrogations , 2007 .

[13]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Memory and Reality , 2022 .

[14]  B. Depaulo,et al.  Lying in everyday life. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Siegfried L. Sporer,et al.  The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts: Reality monitoring and detection of deception , 2004 .

[16]  Maria Hartwig,et al.  To act truthfully: Nonverbal behaviour and strategies during a police interrogation , 2006 .

[17]  James J. Lindsay,et al.  Cues to deception. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  T. Gilovich,et al.  The illusion of transparency: biased assessments of others' ability to read one's emotional states. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  E. Borgida,et al.  Social Psychology and Law , 2010 .

[20]  S. L. Sporer,et al.  The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: a review of the empirical evidence , 2005 .

[21]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Phenomenal characteristics of memories for perceived and imagined autobiographical events. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  Leif A. Strömwall,et al.  Impression and Information Management: On the Strategic Self- Regulation of Innocent and Guilty Suspects , 2010 .

[23]  G. Heydon.  The art of deception: Myths about lie detection in written confessions , 2008 .

[24]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Reality Monitoring , 2005 .

[25]  Susan H. Adams,et al.  Statement Analysis: What Do Suspects' Words Really Reveal? , 1996 .