Brennen Tim, Magnussen Svein
Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Front Psychol. 2022 Apr 5;13:835285. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.835285. eCollection 2022.
There is agreement among researchers that no simple verbal cues to deception detectable by humans have been demonstrated. This paper examines the evidence for the most prominent current methods, critically considers the prevailing research strategy, proposes a taxonomy of lie detection methods and concludes that two common types of approach are unlikely to succeed. An approach to lie detection is advocated that derives both from psychological science and common sense: When an interviewee produces a statement that contradicts either a previous statement by the same person or other information the authorities have, it will in many cases be obvious to interviewer and interviewee that at least one of the statements is a lie and at the very least the credibility of the witness is reduced. The literature on Strategic Use of Evidence shows that features of interviews that foster such revelatory and self-trapping situations have been established to be a free account and the introduction of independent information late and gradually into the proceedings, and tactics based on these characteristics constitute the best current general advice for practitioners. If any other approach 1 day challenges this status quo, it is likely to be highly efficient automated systems.
研究人员一致认为,尚未发现人类可察觉的简单欺骗性言语线索。本文审视了当前最突出方法的证据,批判性地思考了主流研究策略,提出了测谎方法的分类,并得出结论:两种常见方法不太可能成功。本文倡导一种源于心理学和常识的测谎方法:当受访者做出的陈述与同一人之前的陈述或当局掌握的其他信息相矛盾时,在许多情况下,采访者和受访者都会明显意识到至少其中一个陈述是谎言,并且证人的可信度至少会降低。关于证据的策略性使用的文献表明,已确定能促成此类揭示性和自我设陷情况的访谈特征包括自由陈述以及在诉讼后期逐步引入独立信息,基于这些特征的策略构成了当前对从业者的最佳一般性建议。如果有朝一日其他方法挑战了这一现状,很可能是高效的自动化系统。