Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (1)

Search Parameters:
Authors = Pär Anders Granhag

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
20 pages, 371 KiB  
Article
Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future
by Aldert Vrij, Pär Anders Granhag, Tzachi Ashkenazi, Giorgio Ganis, Sharon Leal and Ronald P. Fisher
Brain Sci. 2022, 12(12), 1644; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12121644 - 1 Dec 2022
Cited by 35 | Viewed by 11416
Abstract
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 [...] Read more.
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. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cognitive Approaches to Deception Research)
Back to TopTop