Hartwig Maria, Granhag Pär Anders, Strömwall Leif A, Kronkvist Ola
Department of Psychology, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, The City University of New York, New York, NY 10019, USA.
Law Hum Behav. 2006 Oct;30(5):603-19. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9053-9.
Research on deception detection in legal contexts has neglected the question of how the use of evidence can affect deception detection accuracy. In this study, police trainees (N=82) either were or were not trained in strategically using the evidence when interviewing lying or truth telling mock suspects (N=82). The trainees' strategies as well as liars' and truth tellers' counter-strategies were analyzed. Trained interviewers applied different strategies than did untrained. As a consequence of this, liars interviewed by trained interviewers were more inconsistent with the evidence compared to liars interviewed by untrained interviewers. Trained interviewers created and utilized the statement-evidence consistency cue, and obtained a considerably higher deception detection accuracy rate (85.4%) than untrained interviewers (56.1%).
法律背景下关于欺骗检测的研究忽略了证据的使用如何影响欺骗检测准确性这一问题。在本研究中,警察学员(N = 82)在询问说谎或说实话的模拟嫌疑人(N = 82)时,有的接受了战略性使用证据的培训,有的则没有。分析了学员的策略以及说谎者和说实话者的应对策略。接受培训的面试官与未接受培训的面试官采用了不同的策略。因此,与未接受培训的面试官询问的说谎者相比,接受培训的面试官询问的说谎者与证据的不一致性更大。接受培训的面试官创造并利用了陈述与证据一致性线索,获得了比未接受培训的面试官(56.1%)高得多的欺骗检测准确率(85.4%)。