Evaluation of the effectiveness of a brief deception detection training program

The discrimination of genuine and falsified emotional displays is critical in many contexts, including healthcare, forensic, and airport security settings. Previous research has demonstrated that comprehensive (two-day) empirically based deception detection training can lead to moderate gains in judgment accuracy. However, for many professional groups such extensive training is not feasible due to time and resource limitations. In the present study, we evaluated the effectiveness of brief (three-hour) training. N = 26 (13 females, 13 males) healthcare professionals with experience in evaluating the validity of medical claims participated in the training workshop. Their performance on two deception detection tasks was measured pre- and post-training; the participants attempted to discriminate: (1) videotaped truthful and fabricated stories concerning emotional events and (2) sincere and falsified emotional facial expressions. Results indicated that participants' overall accuracy on both tasks increased modestly from chance (M = 51.2%) to significantly above chance (M = 60.7%), primarily due to an increase in their improved ‘hit’ rate from pre- to post-training.

[1]  Carmen Herrero,et al.  Training to detect what? The biasing effects of training on veracity judgments , 2009 .

[2]  Stephen Porter,et al.  Truth, Lies, and Videotape: An Investigation of the Ability of Federal Parole Officers to Detect Deception , 2000, Law and human behavior.

[3]  Stephen Porter,et al.  Dangerous decisions: A theoretical framework for understanding how judges assess credibility in the courtroom , 2009 .

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

[5]  A. Vrij Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities , 2008 .

[6]  Michael Woodworth,et al.  Halfe the world knowes not how the other halfe lies: Investigation of verbal and non-verbal signs of deception exhibited by criminal offenders and non-offenders , 2008 .

[7]  Christina T. Fong,et al.  “I'm Innocent!”: Effects of Training on Judgments of Truth and Deception in the Interrogation Room , 1999 .

[8]  B. Depaulo,et al.  Accuracy of Deception Judgments , 2006, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[9]  P. Lang,et al.  International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Instruction Manual and Affective Ratings (Tech. Rep. No. A-4) , 1999 .

[10]  S. Porter,et al.  Reading Between the Lies , 2008, Psychological science.

[11]  Pär Anders Granhag,et al.  How to Detect Deception? Arresting the Beliefs of Police Officers, Prosecutors and Judges , 2003 .

[12]  Michael Woodworth,et al.  Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration … or is it? An investigation of the impact of motivation and feedback on deception detection , 2007 .

[13]  S. Porter,et al.  The truth about lies: What works in detecting high‐stakes deception? , 2010 .

[14]  Wiley Mittenberg,et al.  Base Rates of Malingering and Symptom Exeggeration , 2002, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[15]  P. Ekman,et al.  Unmasking the face : a guide to recognizing emotions from facial clues , 1975 .

[16]  A. Vrij,et al.  Police officers', social workers', teachers' and the general public's beliefs about deception in children, adolescents and adults. , 2006 .