Police Officers’ Perceptions of Statement Inconsistency

Abstract

We examined police officers' (N = 71) perceptions of statement inconsistency types (withinstatement, between-statement, statement-evidence, and within-group inconsistencies). Approximately half of the officers reported looking for statement inconsistency to detect deception. Officers generally associated contradictions and omissions with deception, and repetitions and reminiscences with truthfulness, but they were most likely to use contradictions. Officers reported using statement-evidence inconsistency more than any other inconsistency type, and they believed it was the easiest type to assess. Younger officers tended to believe that liars attempt to eliminate within-statement inconsistency unless they are strategically presented with incriminating evidence. Moreover, the majority of officers indicated that they have used drawings to assess inconsistencies with suspects' verbal statements. Finally, suspects' criminal history, intelligence, and personality were believed to influence statement (in)consistency. These findings are discussed in light of the literature on statement inconsistency, and recommendations regarding the applied use of statement inconsistency types are offered.

The interaction of truthful and deceptive information

“…In general, liars tend to be most concerned with reducing the amount of inconsistencies within the details of their statement compared to any other type of inconsistency (e.g. between-statement or statement-evidence inconsistencies; Deeb et al, 2017Deeb et al, , 2018. As a result of their efforts to maintain consistency, liars tend to be equally or more consistent than truth-tellers (Granhag & Strömwall, 2002;Granhag et al, 2003;Vredeveldt et al, 2014), whoas a normal function of memorymay appear inconsistent as information is naturally added or forgotten (e.g.…”

Visuospatial counter‐interrogation strategies by liars familiar with the alibi setting

“…The self-regulation theory posits that individuals attempt to control their behaviour through natural, automatic tendencies to forthcomingness, which is generally associated with honesty (Deeb, Vrij, Hope, Mann, Granhag, & Strömwall, 2017;DePaulo et al, 2003;Greuel, 1992), would make them appear truthful (Granhag et al, 2015 …”

“…Hence, the more familiar liars are with the reported event, the more detailed their statements become (Blandón-Gitlin et al, 2005; Warmelink et al, 2013). Liars may assume that this forthcomingness, which is generally associated with honesty (Deeb, Vrij, Hope, Mann, Granhag, & Strömwall, 2017;DePaulo et al, 2003;Greuel, 1992), would make them appear truthful (Granhag et al, 2015). Nonetheless, this does not mean that their statements would be similar to those of truth-tellers.…”

The Effect of Embedded Lies on the Verbal Quality of Statements and Implications for Credibility Assessment

“…Accordingly, one of the main concerns of liarsand one of their most frequently reported strategiesis to maintain consistency (Deeb, Vrij, Hope, Mann, Granhag, & Lancaster, 2017;Hartwig, Granhag, Strömwall, & Doering, 2010). Moreover, liars tend to be more concerned with reducing the amount of within-statement inconsistency (i.e., inconsistencies between details within a single statement) than any other type of inconsistency, such as betweenstatement inconsistency (i.e., the level of consistency between different statements made by the same suspect) or statement-evidence inconsistency (i.e., the level of consistency between the suspect's statement and the other evidence; Deeb et al, 2017Deeb et al, , 2018. In one of the only studies to include statements that purposefully contained both truths and lies, Deeb et al (2017) instructed liars to provide a statement containing reports about two events, one deceptive and the other truthful, during two interviews.…”

“…Consequently, it is not surprising that liars report to try to maintain consistency as a strategy to appear credible. In general, liars tend to be most concerned with reducing the amount of inconsistencies within the details of their statement compared to any other type of inconsistency (e.g., between-statement or statement-evidence inconsistencies ;Deeb et al, 2017Deeb et al, , 2018. As a result of their efforts to maintain consistency, liars tend to be equally or more consistent than truth-tellers (Granhag & Strömwall, 2002;Granhag et al, 2003;Vredeveldt et al, 2014), whoas a normal function of memorymay appear inconsistent as information is naturally added or forgotten (e.g., Fisher, Brewer, & Mitchel, 2009).…”