Police confidence in lie detection: an assessment of crime types, Miranda and interview techniques

Author:

Frantzen Durant,Hakan Can Salih

Abstract

PurposeExperimental research on lie detection has indicated that accuracy rates hover around chance but that police are significantly better in detecting deception in “high” stakes rather than “low” stakes situations. This paper has three objectives: to compare confidence levels in lie detection for property crime and violent crime detectives; to compare differences in confidence levels for custodial and noncustodial interviews; and to evaluate the relationship between interrogation techniques and lie detection confidence.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses self‐report data from a sample of Texas police detectives.FindingsThe results of this study show that property crime detectives are significantly more confident in their lie detection ability than are violent crime detectives. The results also highlight the fact that police detectives are significantly less confident in their lie detection abilities when the suspect has been provided his or her Miranda warnings.Originality/valueThe study highlights the disparity in findings derived from self‐reported data and experimental studies on veracity judgments and the need to account for contextual factors that ultimately impact the ecological validity of this research.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Law,Applied Psychology,Social Psychology

Reference23 articles.

1. Aamodt, M.G. and Custer, H. (2006), “Who can best catch a liar? A meta‐analysis of individual differences in detecting deception”, The Forensic Examiner, Vol. 25, pp. 6‐11.

2. Aaronson, E. and Carlsmith, J.M. (1968), “Experimentation in social psychology”, in Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (Eds), Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed., Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA, pp. 1‐79.

3. Bond, C.F. and DePaulo, B.M. (2006), “Accuracy of deception judgments”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 10, pp. 214‐34.

4. Culhane, S.E., Hosch, H.M. and Heck, C. (2008), “Interview technique endorsement by current law enforcement, future law enforcement, and laypersons”, Police Quarterly, Vol. 11, pp. 366‐86.

5. Davies, H. (2007), “Understanding variations in murder clearance rates: the influence of the political environment”, Homicide Studies, Vol. 11, pp. 133‐50.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3