The Efficacy of Using Countermeasures in a Model Statement Interview

Abstract

A B S T R A C TIn a countermeasures experiment, we examined to what extent liars who learn about the Model Statement tool and about the proportion of complications (complications/complications + common knowledge details + self-handicapping strategies) can successfully adjust their responses so that they sound like truth tellers. Truth tellers discussed a trip they had made; liars fabricated a story. Participants were of Lebanese, Mexican, and South-Korean origin. Prior to the interview they did or did not receive information about (i) the working of the Model statement and (ii) three types of verbal detail: complications, common knowledge details and self-handicapping strategies. We found no evidence that liars sounded like truth tellers after being informed about the Model Statement and/or types of detail we examined. Actually, veracity differences were similar across experimental conditions, with truth tellers reporting more detail and more complications and obtaining a higher proportion of complications score than liars. Palabras clave: Medidas correctivasRecopilación de información Engaño Declaración modelo Proporción de complicaciones

Verbal cues to deceit when lying through omitting information

“…Self-handicapping strategies are justifications why someone cannot remember some information. Such justifications are more difficult to create without raising suspicion when an event happened a short time ago (Vrij, Mann, Leal, Fisher, & Deeb, 2020).…”

Sketching while narrating as a tool to detect deceit

“…Researchers recently started to examine specific types of detail: complications, common knowledge details and self‐handicapping strategies. A complication is an occurrence that affects the story‐teller and makes a situation more difficult (e.g., “Initially we could not see each other, each of us was waiting at a different entrance”) (Vrij et al, ). Self‐handicapping strategies refer to justifications as to why someone is not able to provide information (“I can't remember the details; it happened a while ago”) (Vrij, Leal, Jupe, & Harvey, ).…”

“…Common knowledge details refer to strongly invoked stereotypical information about events (e.g., “We went to the Louvre Museum in Paris where we saw the Mona Lisa”) (Vrij, Leal, Jupe, & Harvey, ). Truth tellers typically report more complications than liars, whereas liars typically report more common knowledge details and self‐handicapping strategies than truth tellers (Leal, Vrij, Deeb, & Kamermans, ; Vrij et al, , , b, , ). The research to date also showed that complications is the most diagnostic cue out of these three variables.…”

A critical analysis of the Model Statement literature: Should this tool be used in practice?

“…In the 14 published MS studies that we are interested in, information elicitation effects were observed (Bogaard, Meijer, & Vrij, 2014; Bogaard et al, 2020; Ewens et al, 2016; Harvey, Vrij, Leal, Lafferty, & Nahari, 2017; Harvey, Vrij, Leal, Hope, & Mann, 2019; Kleinberg, Van Der Toolen, Vrij, Arntz, & Verschuere, 2018; Leal et al, 2015; Leal, Vrij, Deeb, & Jupe, 2018; Leal, et al, 2019b; Porter et al, 2018, Porter & Salvanelli, 2020; Vrij et al, 2017a; Vrij, Leal, Jupe, & Harvey, 2018; Vrij et al, 2020). However, in general, a review of the literature reveals that the MS has been (largely) unsuccessful at enhancing lie‐detection performance (see Table 3).…”