Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Salles, Bruno
Data de Publicação: 2020
Tipo de documento: Artigo Outros
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
Texto Completo: https://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/708
Resumo: Lying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.
id IPEBJ_624b5e72a2ab4a57e5386c7360d48f2b
oai_identifier_str oai:bjfs:article/708
network_acronym_str IPEBJ
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
spelling Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic ProfessionalsLie detectionDecepetionVerbal Credibility AssessmentNonverbal BehaviorForensic ContextLying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.Lying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.IPEBJ2020-06-29info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionRevisãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/70810.17063/bjfs9(3)y2020373-393Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics; v. 9 n. 3 (2020): Volume 9 - Número 3; 373-393Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics; Vol. 9 No. 3 (2020): Volume 9 - Número 3; 373-3932237-261Xreponame:Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethicsinstname:Instituto Paulista de Estudos Bioéticos e Jurídicos (IPEBJ)instacron:IPEBJenghttps://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/708/895Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethicshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSalles, Bruno2021-04-22T12:23:08Zoai:bjfs:article/708Revistahttps://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/homePRIhttps://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/oai2237-261X2237-261Xopendoar:2021-04-22 12:23:08.966Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics - Instituto Paulista de Estudos Bioéticos e Jurídicos (IPEBJ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
title Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
spellingShingle Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
Salles, Bruno
Lie detection
Decepetion
Verbal Credibility Assessment
Nonverbal Behavior
Forensic Context
title_short Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
title_full Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
title_fullStr Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
title_full_unstemmed Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
title_sort Do Lie Detection Tools Really Catch Liars? A Guide for Forensic Professionals
author Salles, Bruno
author_facet Salles, Bruno
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Salles, Bruno
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Lie detection
Decepetion
Verbal Credibility Assessment
Nonverbal Behavior
Forensic Context
topic Lie detection
Decepetion
Verbal Credibility Assessment
Nonverbal Behavior
Forensic Context
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Lying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.
Lying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.
description Lying is ubiquitous in every society. However, in forensic contexts lies must be revealed so that investigations/judgments can be fair and effective. For this reason, distinct tools (verbal and nonverbal) of lie detection were examined. CBCA and RM showed the best performance in distinguishing between truth and lie within verbal tools. Lack of empirical support made SCAN not recommended for lie detection applications. Moreover, studies have shown that people guided by BAI are less accurate in detecting lies than untrained people. Ekman’s Deception Theory (EDT) showed more effective predictions about nonverbal deception cues than BAI. However, the lack of standardization in the use of EDT predictions to detect lies can be seen as a weakness of the method. Future efforts may be aimed at developing a tool that uses both verbal and nonverbal predictions to obtain greater accuracy in detecting lies than currently available methods.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-06-29
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Revisão
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
format article
other
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/708
10.17063/bjfs9(3)y2020373-393
url https://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/708
identifier_str_mv 10.17063/bjfs9(3)y2020373-393
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.ipebj.com.br/bjfs/index.php/bjfs/article/view/708/895
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv IPEBJ
publisher.none.fl_str_mv IPEBJ
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics; v. 9 n. 3 (2020): Volume 9 - Número 3; 373-393
Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics; Vol. 9 No. 3 (2020): Volume 9 - Número 3; 373-393
2237-261X
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
instname:Instituto Paulista de Estudos Bioéticos e Jurídicos (IPEBJ)
instacron:IPEBJ
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
collection Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics
instname_str Instituto Paulista de Estudos Bioéticos e Jurídicos (IPEBJ)
instacron_str IPEBJ
institution IPEBJ
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Medical Law and Bioethics - Instituto Paulista de Estudos Bioéticos e Jurídicos (IPEBJ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1697756592092479488

Registros relacionados