Suppr超能文献

群体共享隐藏信息的心理生理检测:搜索式犯罪知情测试的实证研究

Psychophysiological detection of concealed information shared by groups: an empirical study of the searching CIT.

作者信息

Breska Assaf, Zaidenberg Daphna, Gronau Nurit, Ben-Shakhar Gershon

机构信息

Department of Psychology.

Department of Psychology & Cognitive Science Studies, The Open University of Israel.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Appl. 2014 Jun;20(2):136-46. doi: 10.1037/xap0000015. Epub 2014 Feb 24.

Abstract

This study focused on the application of the Concealed Information Test (CIT) to situations in which the crime-related information is shared by a group of suspects but is not available to the investigators (a method known as the "searching CIT," or SCIT). Twenty-two groups, each comprising 4 to 7 participants (115 in total), planned 1 of 2 mock crimes (kidnapping or bank robbery). While planning the crime, each group decided on 5 crime-related critical items (e.g., the city in which the bank was located). Each critical item was chosen from a predefined set of 4 alternatives. At a second stage, the SCIT was administered individually and each participant was tested on the 2 crimes-the actual planned crime, in which the participant was "guilty," and the unplanned crime, in which the participant was "innocent." Two algorithms, adopted from Breska, Ben-Shakhar, and Gronau (2012), were applied to detect the critical items and to differentiate between "guilty" and "innocent" participants. Findings revealed that differentiation efficiency based on electrodermal and respiration measures was identical to that obtained with the standard CIT when applied to large groups, but lower, although significantly greater than chance, when applied to differentiate between small groups.

摘要

本研究聚焦于隐蔽信息测试(CIT)在犯罪相关信息由一组嫌疑人共享但调查人员无法获取的情况下的应用(一种被称为“搜索CIT”或SCIT的方法)。二十二个小组,每组由4至7名参与者组成(共115人),策划了两种模拟犯罪之一(绑架或银行抢劫)。在策划犯罪时,每个小组确定了5个与犯罪相关的关键项目(例如,银行所在的城市)。每个关键项目从预先定义的4个备选项目中选取。在第二阶段,单独进行SCIT测试,每位参与者要就两种犯罪接受测试——实际策划的犯罪(参与者在其中“有罪”)和未策划的犯罪(参与者在其中“无罪”)。采用了布雷斯卡、本-沙哈尔和格罗瑙(2012年)的两种算法来检测关键项目,并区分“有罪”和“无罪”的参与者。研究结果显示,当应用于大组时,基于皮电和呼吸测量的区分效率与标准CIT相同,但当应用于区分小组时,效率较低,尽管显著高于随机水平。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验