Bogaard Glynis, Meijer Ewout H, Vrij Aldert, Merckelbach Harald
Maastricht University, Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Section Forensic Psychology, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
University of Portsmouth, Department of Psychology, Portsmouth, The United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 3;11(6):e0156615. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156615. eCollection 2016.
The present study investigated the beliefs of students and police officers about cues to deception. A total of 95 police officers and 104 undergraduate students filled out a questionnaire addressing beliefs about cues to deception. Twenty-eight verbal cues were included in the questionnaire, all extracted from verbal credibility assessment tools (i.e., CBCA, RM, and SCAN). We investigated to what extent beliefs about nonverbal and verbal cues of deception differed between lay people (students) and police officers, and whether these beliefs were in agreement with objective cues known from research. Both students and police officers believed the usual stereotypical, but non-diagnostic (nonverbal) cues such as gaze aversion and increased movement to be indicative of deception. Yet, participants were less inclined to overestimate the relationship between verbal cues and deception and their beliefs fitted better with what we know from research. The implications of these findings for practice are discussed.
本研究调查了学生和警察对欺骗线索的看法。共有95名警察和104名本科生填写了一份关于欺骗线索看法的问卷。问卷中包含28种言语线索，均从言语可信度评估工具（即CBCA、RM和SCAN）中提取。我们调查了外行（学生）和警察对欺骗的非言语和言语线索的看法在多大程度上存在差异，以及这些看法是否与研究中已知的客观线索一致。学生和警察都认为常见的刻板但非诊断性的（非言语）线索，如目光回避和动作增加，表明存在欺骗行为。然而，参与者不太倾向于高估言语线索与欺骗之间的关系，他们的看法与我们从研究中了解到的情况更相符。讨论了这些发现对实践的启示。
