The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts: Discerning lies from truths: behavioural cues to deception and the indirect pathway of intuition

98 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Dishonesty in Everyday Life and Its Policy Implications (2006, background): “If this is the case, cues, such as a higher-pitched voice, increased pupil size, or lip pressing, which in general accompany attempted, conscious deception, should not be available to the observer, thus making the deceit more difficult to detect (DePaulo and Morris 2004).”
On Lying and Being Lied To: A Linguistic Analysis of Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication (2007, background): “…there is some controversy about the exact role of motivation in deception, empirical research to date suggests that higher levels of motivation facilitate the liar’s ability to deceive their partner when only verbal information is available (see Burgoon & Floyd, 2000; DePaulo & Morris, 2004).”
Is This Testimony Truthful, Fabricated, or Based on False Memory? (2014, background): “In part, this may relate to the fact that situational conditions (e.g., the complexity of the lie, the motivation of the liar to get away with the lie, the stakes involved, or the interview style) vary greatly between studies (DePaulo & Morris, 2004; Vrij, 2008).”