and Nothing but the Truth

Issues regarding witness credibility are a crucial aspect of most, if not all, courtroom trials. Since factual information and evidence are necessarily incomplete and contradictory, “those charged with decision-making, whether they may be judges or jurors, must not only weigh the information and evidence, but must also evaluate the veracity of the opposing evidential and informational sources” (Miller & Boster, 1977, p. 28). Sometimes assessments of credibility can be made by comparing a witness’s testimony with that of other witnesses; for example, if six people observe a crime, and five of the six identify the defendant as the culprit while the sixth does not, then unless there are strong grounds for doubting the veracity of the five consistent witnesses, the sixth witness’s testimony will typically be discounted as stemming from error or even deliberate distortion. On other occasions, credibility judgments may hinge on extrinsic factors associated with the witness; for example, if it can be shown that a witness’s testimony is self-serving, then it is likely to be viewed more skeptically than testimony free of self-serving motives, or particularly, testimony diametrically opposed to the witness’s self-interest.

[1]  A. Mehrabian.  Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior , 1968 .

[2]  James A. Thurber,et al.  ACCURACY OF JUDGMENTS OF DECEPTION WHEN AN INTERVIEW IS WATCHED, HEARD, AND READ , 1968 .

[3]  James B. Lemert,et al.  DIMENSIONS FOR EVALUATING THE ACCEPTABILITY OF MESSAGE SOURCES , 1969 .

[4]  J. Brown.  The Motivation Of Behavior , 1961 .

[5]  M. Knapp,et al.  An Exploration of Deception as a Communication Construct , 1974 .

[6]  Direct Interval-Estimation: A Ratio Scaling Method , 1975 .

[7]  The Ability to Judge Truth-Telling, OR Lying, from the Voice as Transmitted Over A Public Address System , 1941 .

[8]  SENSITIVITY TO ATTEMPTS AT DECEPTION IN AN INTERVIEW SITUATION1, 2 , 1966 .

[9]  Michael G. Ryan.  The Influence of Teleconferencing Medium and Status on Participants’ Perception of the Aestheticism, Evaluation, Privacy, Potency, and Activity of the Medium , 1976 .

[10]  Albert Mehrabian,et al.  Nonverbal betrayal of feeling. , 1971 .

[11]  A. Mehrabian,et al.  Language Within Language: Immediacy, a Channel in Verbal Communication , 1968 .

[12]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[13]  J. Mccroskey.  Scales for the measurement of ethos , 1966 .

[14]  P. Ekman,et al.  Detecting deception from the body or face. , 1974 .

[15]  John Thibaut,et al.  VISUAL INTERACTION IN RELATION TO MACHIAVELLIANISM AND AN UNETHICAL ACT. , 1966 .

[16]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  Distraction Increases Yielding to Propaganda by Inhibiting Counterarguing. , 1970 .

[17]  Paul V. Trovillo.  A history of lie detection. , 1939 .

[18]  Reliability of Reasons Used in Making Judgments of Honesty and Dishonesty , 1967, Perceptual and motor skills.

[19]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  Acceptance of persuasion and the inhibition of counterargumentation under various distraction tasks , 1974 .

[20]  H. Blalock,et al.  Applied multivariate analysis and experimental designs , 1975 .

[21]  P. Ekman,et al.  Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception †. , 1969, Psychiatry.

[22]  G. Miller,et al.  Videotape on trial : a view from the jury box , 1979 .