Masip Jaume, Martínez Carmen, Blandón-Gitlin Iris, Sánchez Nuria, Herrero Carmen, Ibabe Izaskun
Department of Social Psychology and Anthropology, University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain.
Department of Psychology, California State University Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2018 Jan 4;8:2207. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02207. eCollection 2017.
Previous research has shown that inconsistencies across repeated interviews do not indicate deception because liars deliberately tend to repeat the same story. However, when a strategic interview approach that makes it difficult for liars to use the repeat strategy is used, both consistency and evasive answers differ significantly between truth tellers and liars, and statistical software (binary logistic regression analyses) can reach high classification rates (Masip et al., 2016b). Yet, if the interview procedure is to be used in applied settings the decision process will be made by humans, not statistical software. To address this issue, in the current study, 475 college students (Experiment 1) and 142 police officers (Experiment 2) were instructed to code and use consistency, evasive answers, or a combination or both before judging the veracity of Masip et al.'s (2016b) interview transcripts. Accuracy rates were high (60% to over 90%). Evasive answers yielded higher rates than consistency, and the combination of both these cues produced the highest accuracy rates in identifying both truthful and deceptive statements. Uninstructed participants performed fairly well (around 75% accuracy), apparently because they spontaneously used consistency and evasive answers. The pattern of results was the same among students, all officers, and veteran officers only, and shows that inconsistencies between interviews and evasive answers reveal deception when a strategic interview approach that hinders the repeat strategy is used.
先前的研究表明，重复访谈中的不一致并不表明存在欺骗行为，因为说谎者往往会刻意重复相同的故事。然而，当采用一种让说谎者难以运用重复策略的策略性访谈方法时，说真话者和说谎者在回答的一致性和回避性方面会有显著差异，并且统计软件（二元逻辑回归分析）能够达到较高的分类准确率（马西普等人，2016b）。然而，如果要在实际应用中使用访谈程序，决策过程将由人而非统计软件来做出。为了解决这个问题，在当前的研究中，475名大学生（实验1）和142名警察（实验2）被要求在判断马西普等人（2016b）的访谈记录的真实性之前，对回答的一致性、回避性或两者的组合进行编码并加以运用。准确率很高（60%至90%以上）。回避性回答的准确率高于一致性，并且这两种线索的组合在识别真实陈述和欺骗性陈述时产生的准确率最高。未接受指导的参与者表现相当不错（准确率约为75%），显然是因为他们自发地运用了一致性和回避性回答。学生、所有警察以及仅资深警察中的结果模式是相同的，这表明当使用一种阻碍重复策略的策略性访谈方法时，访谈之间的不一致和回避性回答能够揭示欺骗行为。
