The ABC’s of CBCA: Verbal Credibility Assessment in Practice

Griesel, Dorothee; Ternes, Marguerite; Schraml, Domenica; Cooper, Brian F.; Yuille, John C.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_12

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in the field of forensics an objective and strict decision criterion based on stringent standards of evidence should prevail over subjective clinical judgements, i.e., the rate of classification of false statements as true (false positives) should be 0 (i.e., the burden of proof is on the prosecution; it is entirely inadmissible to present incriminating expert forensic testimony on the basis of unsubstantiated evidences). It would be a decision rule based on data for controlling false positives and to ensure reliable coding (i.e., within-raters, between-raters, and between-context consistency), which would offset the potential effects of a truth bias or a response bias associated to the application of reality criteria (Griesel et al, 2013;Rassin, 1999;Sporer, 2004). The results of previous meta-analyses have shown it is possible, i.e., in field studies approximately 97% of truthful statements contained more reality criteria than fabricated accounts, with an approximately 90% total independence between the distributions of both groups of statements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the basis of this hypothesis, Steller and Köhnken (1989) have integrated all the categorical systems (e.g., Arntzen, 1970;Dettenborn, Froehlich, & Szewczyk, 1984;Szewczyk, 1973;Undeutsch, 1967) into what is known as Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA), which has become the leading categorical system for evaluating the credibility of a testimony (Griesel, Ternes, Schraml, Cooper, & Yuille, 2013;Vrij, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accordingly, this achieves face validity, with (Konecni & Ebbesen, 1992). Nevertheless, in spite of the weaknesses of this experimental paradigm in generalizing CBCA outcomes to the forensic context, experimental laboratory studies are useful for assessing certain variables that may lead to further internal validity research (Griesel et al, 2013). In contrast, the limitation of field studies resides in their difficulty in sustaining the ground truth in accurate objective criteria.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review

Amado¹,

Fernández²,

Rivera³

2015

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

107

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThe credibility of a testimony is a crucial component of judicial decision-making. Checklists of testimony credibility criteria are extensively used by forensic psychologists to assess the credibility of a testimony, and in many countries they are admitted as valid scientific evidence in a court of law. These checklists are based on the Undeutsch hypothesis asserting that statements derived from the memory of real-life experiences differ significantly in content and quality from fabricated or fictitious accounts. Notwithstanding, there is considerable controversy regarding the degree to which these checklists comply with the legal standards for scientific evidence to be admitted in a court of law (e.g., Daubert standards). In several countries, these checklists are not admitted as valid evidence in court, particularly in view of the inconsistent results reported in the scientific literature. Bearing in mind these issues, a meta-analysis was designed to test the Undeutsch hypothesis using the CBCA Checklist of criteria to discern between memories of self-experienced real-life events and fabricated or fictitious accounts. As the original hypothesis was formulated for populations of children, only quantitative studies with samples of children were considered for this study. In line with the Undeutsch hypothesis, the results showed a significant positive effect size that is generalizable to the total CBCA score, = 0.79. Moreover, a significant positive effect size was observed in each and all of the credibility criteria. In conclusion, the results corroborated the validity of the Undeutsch hypothesis and the CBCA criteria for discriminating between the memory of real self-experienced events and false or invented accounts. The results are discussed in terms of the implications for forensic practice. La hipótesis Undeutsch y el "Criteria Based Content Analysis": una revisión metaanalíticaR E S U M E N Con frecuencia, la evaluación de la fiabilidad de un testimonio se lleva a cabo mediante el uso de sistemas categoriales de análisis de contenido. Concretamente, el instrumento más utilizado para determinar la credibilidad del testimonio es el Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA), el cual se sustenta en la hipótesis Undeutsch, que establece que las memorias de un hecho auto-experimentado difieren en contenido y calidad de las memorias fabricadas o imaginadas. Las opiniones y resultados contradictorios encontrados en la literatura científica respecto al cumplimiento de los criterios judiciales (Daubert standards) así como el abundante número de trabajos existentes sobre la materia, nos llevó a diseñar un meta-análisis para someter a prueba la hipótesis Undeutsch, a través de la validez de los criterios de realidad del CBCA para discriminar entre la memoria de lo auto-experimentado y lo fabricado. Se tomaron aquellos estudios cuantitativos que incluían muestras de menores, esto es, con edades comprendidas entre los 2 y 18 años. En línea con la hipótesis Undeutsch, los resultados mostraron un tamaño del efec...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review

Amado¹,

Fernández²,

Rivera³

2015

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

107

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…y 5) ¿Es la teoría científica o la técnica aceptada generalmente como válida por la comunidad científica? Una de las técnicas más utilizadas y que cumplen parcialmente dichos criterios, es el sistema categorial de Criterios Basados en el Análisis de Contenido (Criteria Based Content Analysis -CBCA) (Arce, 2017;Griesel, Ternes, Schraml, Cooper, y Yuille, 2013;Steller y Böhm, 2006;Vrij, 2008). El CBCA es una parte del sistema de Análisis de Validez de la Declaración (Stament Validity Análisis -SVA) que se basa en la hipótesis Undeutsch.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

¿discriminan Los Criterios De Realidad Del Cbca Entre Memorias Visionadas, Pero No Experimentadas, Y Fabricadas De Un Evento? Una Revisión Meta-Analítica / [Do the Cbca Reality Criteria Discriminate Between Watched but Not Experienced and Fabricated Memories of an Event? A Meta-Analitic Review]

Sanmarco¹,

Vázquez²,

Rivera³

2020

Colección Psicología Y Ley

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

testimonio, el CBCA (Análisis de Contenido Basado en Criterios) es la herramienta más utilizada a nivel mundial. Recientes meta-análisis han confirmado que las categorías de realidad del CBCA discriminan entre memorias fabricadas de eventos y memorias de eventos auto-experimentados en poblaciones de adultos y menores y diferentes contextos. Sin embargo, no se ha estudiado como moderador si también disciernen entre memorias fabricadas basadas en hechos visionados, pero no vividos, y memorias fabricadas de hechos. Por ello, se ejecutó un meta-análisis con los estudios con este tipo de diseño, encontrando 5 estudios primarios de los que se obtuvieron 6 tamaños del efecto. Los resultados son dispares, encontrándonos desde tamaños del efecto positivos a negativos y nulos. Se discuten las implicaciones de los resultados para la práctica forense y a futura investigación.

show abstract

“…For instance, police and legal actors often encounter deceptive or misleading statements from suspects, witnesses, and even victims. Conducting verbal credibility assessment is of particular importance during investigations or legal proceedings in which physical evidence is absent or inconclusive (e.g., Griesel et al, 2013). For example, when US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was accused of historical sexual abuse, the Senate Judiciary Committee arranged a hearing to determine the veracity of the allegations.…”

Section: Relevance Of the Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Verigin¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.

show abstract

The ABC’s of CBCA: Verbal Credibility Assessment in Practice

Cited by 11 publications

References 45 publications

Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review

Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review

¿discriminan Los Criterios De Realidad Del Cbca Entre Memorias Visionadas, Pero No Experimentadas, Y Fabricadas De Un Evento? Una Revisión Meta-Analítica / [Do the Cbca Reality Criteria Discriminate Between Watched but Not Experienced and Fabricated Memories of an Event? A Meta-Analitic Review]

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About