Zarah Vernham

A review of the collective interviewing approach to detecting deception in pairs

Collective interviewing – the interviewing of multiple suspects simultaneously – has been neglected within the deception detection literature, yet it has the potential to have theoretical and practical implications for professionals involved in citizen security. The current review recaps the importance of lie detection and when collective interviewing can be used, before summarising the collective interviewing deception studies published to date. The published studies show that a lack of interactive and communicative cues, such as posing questions to one another, correcting one another, interrupting one another, finishing each other’s sentences and looking at one another, are significant indicators of deceit. The review highlights that theories about memory and group dynamics are crucial to understanding the deception occurring within groups, and therefore should be the focus of future collective interviewing deception studies. Additionally, some comparisons are made between individual and collective interviewing with the take-home message that collective interviewing should not replace individual interviewing, but that both types of interviewing should be used, perhaps sometimes in conjunction with one another.

Drawing-based deception detection techniques: a state-of-the-art review

ABSTRACT The current article presents a concise overview of the emerging literature on drawing-based deception detection techniques. We cover the theoretical rationale of such techniques as well as the main results from the extant empirical studies. These studies have primarily looked at differences in the drawings between truth tellers and liars in terms of quality (e.g. detail, plausibility) and consistency (both within-group, and between-statement). The findings highlight drawings as a promising tool to elicit differences between truth tellers and liars on such cues. The article also examines more practical aspects, such as practitioners’ experience of the approach and preference for the approach in training studies. Finally, the susceptibility of the approach to counter-measures and directions for future research are discussed. Although research on drawing-based deception detection techniques is still very much in its infancy, results of this first round of studies are promising. They indicate the potential of incorporating drawings into real-life investigative interviews as a cheap, effective, and easy-to-use approach to deception detection.

Dysfunctional expertise and its relationship with dynamic risk factors in offenders

ABSTRACT Predicting the risk an offender poses is vital for protecting the public and/or the offender themselves; thus reducing recidivism rates. Dynamic risk factors are useful for informing treatment programmes because of their changeability. However, the current conceptualisation of dynamic risk factors has recently been under scrutiny within the rehabilitation literature, because their categorical nature lacks description and cannot explain the underlying causal mechanisms of offending behaviours. Expertise is a new area within the rehabilitation literature that examines the decision-making processes involved across the offending episode (prior, during, and after a crime). It is one example of how looking more closely at the processes the offender employs across the offending episode might help to understand more clearly some of the mechanisms underlying dynamic risk factors. This article first discusses the literature and theoretical models that have been proposed with regard to risk prediction and offender expertise, before exploring the links between the two. Using a theoretical framework, which moves away from a deficit-based focus to one in which emphasis is placed on the offenders own personal agency, the authors describe how the competencies underpinning cognition can be used as a starting point for positive change. Implications for offender treatments are discussed.

Detecting Deception within Small Groups: A Literature Review.

Investigators often have multiple suspects to interview in order to determine whether they are guilty or innocent of a crime. Nevertheless, co-offending has been significantly neglected within the deception detection literature. The current review is the first of its kind to discuss co-offending and the importance of examining the detection of deception within groups. Groups of suspects can be interviewed separately (individual interviewing) or simultaneously (collective interviewing) and these differing interviewing styles are assessed throughout the review. The review emphasizes the differences between lone individuals and groups. It focuses on the theoretical implications of group deceit and the reasons why groups need to be understood in terms of investigative interviewing and deception detection if all types of crime-related incidents are to be recognized and dealt with appropriately. Group strategies, consistency within- and between-statements, joint memory, and group dynamics are referred to throughout the review and the importance of developing interview protocols specifically for groups is discussed. The review concludes by identifying the gaps in the literature and suggesting ideas for future research, highlighting that more research is required if we are to obtain a true understanding of the deception occurring within groups and how best to detect it.

Collective interviewing: the use of a model statement to differentiate between pairs of truth-tellers and pairs of liars

Purpose. The current experiment examined the use of a model statement for aiding lie detection and gathering additional information during interviews in which pairs of suspects were interviewed together (i.e., collective interviewing). A model statement is an example of an answer, unrelated to the topic under investigation, which is played to suspects to demonstrate howmuch information the interviewerwants them to provide in response to the question asked.

Cross-cultural verbal deception

Background. ‘Interviewing to detect deception’ research is sparse across different Ethnic Groups. In the present experiment, we interviewed truth tellers and liars from British, Chinese, and Arab origins. British interviewees belong to a low-context culture (using a communication style that relies heavily on explicit and direct language), whereas Chinese and Arab interviewees belong to high-context cultures (communicate in ways that are implicit and rely heavily on context).

Getting Closer to the Action: Using the Virtual Enactment Method to Understand Burglary

ABSTRACT In this article we describe a new method, the Virtual Enactment Method (VEM), to enhance offender recall and motivation to disclose information by having burglars reflect on their experience while committing a crime in a simulated virtual environment. Participants, a sample of 61 incarcerated burglars, ‘thought aloud’ whilst undertaking a virtual burglary. Following the ‘virtual’ burglary, emerging themes were expanded upon in an interview. We show that the simulated environment effectively reinstates the criminogenic event, increases engagement, enhances recall, and encourages participants to talk more openly about their experiences, skills and knowledge.

Corrigendum: Detecting Deception within Small Groups: A Literature Review

[This corrects the article on p. 1012 in vol. 7, PMID: 27445957.].