The objective of this study is the development of an applicable comprehensive questioning and statement analysis procedure. One hundred and thirty-six male residents of the Wynne Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice -Institutional Division (TDCJ -ID) witnessed a staged theft, and provided testimony. Interview formats followed semi-standardized scripts derived from Structured Interview, Inferential Interview and Cognitive Interview techniques. Participants were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions in a 2(honesty of reporting) Â 3(interview technique) matrix. Results found a 62% classification accuracy for the Structured Interview, 68% for the Cognitive Interview and 82% for the Inferential Interview, when comparisons were made between treatment phases of each interview condition. When responses given to each interview segment were analysed, 83% of the Structured Interview transcripts were correctly identified, as were 91% of the Inferential and 92.9% of the Cognitive Interview statements. The desire to prevaricate while escaping detection produced statements which were systematically different from honest reporting, as seen in the variables of coherence, response length, type-token ratio, and verbal hedges. These results indicate a potential forensic utility for strategies which attempt to detect deception through a combination of qualitative and quantitative statement characteristics, and underscore the need for systematic, question-by-question analysis of eyewitness statements.

This study describes the assimilation and validation of Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID). ACID is derived from investigative interviewing, Criteria-BasedKey words: investigative interviewing; deception; credibility; reality monitoring; CBCA; vividness; spontaneity There is a crucial need to develop a valid and applicable method for obtaining and evaluating information during an investigation. The present research is a validation of one such system of interviewing and credibility assessment, known as Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID). ACID combines content criteria derived from research in interpersonal deception and memory with investigative interviewing to facilitate the detection of deception.

No abstract

Psychopathic personality disorder (psychopathy) consists of a distinct pattern of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral symptoms. Emotionally, psychopaths lack empathy for others or guilt for their misdeeds, and they have difficulty forming strong affective bonds. Behaviorally, psychopaths tend to be irresponsible and prone to criminality. Interpersonally, psychopaths are grandiose, callous, and deceitful (Cleckley, 1976;Cooke & Michie, 2001;Hare, 1991). The relevance of the construct of psychopathy to forensic mental health services hardly can be overstated, in that it repeatedly has been shown to identify individuals who are at increased risk for various negative outcomes (e.g., treatment failure, criminal recidivism, violent recidivism) across several forensic and criminal justice populations (

Purpose. Previous research has suggested that true and invented memories can be distinguished between using the reality monitoring criteria. Two different coding schemes were used to examine the correct classification of reports as truthful or deceptive on the basis of individual reality-monitoring (RM) criteria. Method. Drawing upon the RM framework the present experiment examined transcripts of verbal accounts of eyewitnesses to a staged event or made up details about the incident. The statements were elicited during a face-to-face cognitive interview (CI) and were analysed by coders trained in the identification of criteria indicative of self-experienced and invented accounts (referred to here as Version 1) and a similar coding method (referred to here as Version 2). Results. A distinction was made between 'external memories' (affective, perceptual, and contextual details) and 'internal' memories (cognitive operations). For Version 1, the results indicated a higher number of contextual and external details in the descriptions of experienced events and as is commonly found in the deception literature, truthful accounts were longer. For Version 2, temporal and auditory details were more frequent in true accounts. Contrary to prediction, there were also more references to cognitive operations in true accounts. Conclusions. Any forensic application of RM should consider how external factors (characteristics of the event, motivation to deceive, and questioning style) influence the presence of RM criteria. © 2010 The British Psychological Society