SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Purpose

The current study seeks to expand the deception detection literature by using real-world pre-interrogative interviews to discern differences in how novices (students) versus experts (police officers) make judgments about truths and lies.

Methods

Videotapes of routine traffic stops depicting either liars (incriminating evidence was found in the car) or truth-tellers (no evidence was found in the car) were edited so the final car search was cut out. Novices and experts watched the tapes and made truth or lie judgments about the subject in each video.

Results

Overall accuracy of detecting truths and lies for students was 63%, while overall accuracy for police was 60%. The difference between the groups was not significant. These results were then compared with previously published rates (Bond & DePaulo, 2006). Students' overall accuracy rates in this study were higher than previously published accuracy rates. However, police officers' accuracy rates were not higher than previously published accuracy rates.

Conclusions

Realistic stimulus materials seem to increase overall accuracy rates for students. However, despite differences in experience, there was no difference between novice and expert truth and lie accuracy.