Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities

By Aldert Vrij. 2008

974 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/811df19d09075e5186b60e5fcaf12dde45b61f4b

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

The truth about lies: What works in detecting high‐stakes deception? (2010, methodology): “A second line of work relevant to understanding pitfalls in catching liars has focused on more 'natural' biases in legal decision-making (see Vrij, 2008a).”
Lie Detection from Multiple Cues: A Meta‐analysis (2014, methodology): “We searched the Social Sciences Citation Index for papers that cited key references, scoured relevant convention programs, examined reference lists from previous reviews (DePaulo et al., 2003; Vrij, 2008), and reviewed the references cited in every article we found.”
Crime profiles and conditional release performance of psychopathic and non‐psychopathic sexual offenders (2009, background): “Indeed, this seems especially likely given the evidence that parole officers (like most other professional groups studied to date; see Vrij, 2008), who may provide essential information about the offender to the parole board, are poor at detecting deception (Porter, Woodworth, & Birt, 2000).”
Deception detection in Russian texts (2017, background): “Vrij (2010) pointed out that machines are far outperform humans at detecting deception.”
Dangerous decisions: the impact of first impressions of trustworthiness on the evaluation of legal evidence and defendant culpability (2010, background): “Further, judges are susceptible to critical thinking errors and a reliance on false stereotypes that may be cited to justify their initial, unreliable assessment (e.g. Granhag & Strömwall, 2004; Vrij & Mann, 2004; Vrij, 2004, 2008).”
Eliciting Reliable Information in Investigative Interviews (2014, background): “…been published to date showing around 72% accuracy in distinguishing truths and lies with CBCA (albeit the vast majority of them are laboratory studies with adult participants, not the intended context, making it difficult to assess its accuracy in real-life child sexual abuse cases; Vrij, 2008).”
Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked (2012, methodology): “…whether people become better ie detectors if they are taught to pay attention to some specific ues (Bull, 2004; Driskell, 2011; Frank & Feeley, 2003; Vrij, 2008), nd whether lie detection is easier in high-stakes situations than in ow-stakes situations (O’Sullivan, Frank, Hurley, & Tiwana, 2009).…”
‘Look into my eyes’: can an instruction to maintain eye contact facilitate lie detection? (2010, background): “Describing events in detail is typically more cognitively challenging for liars than for truth tellers (Köhnken, 1996, 2004; Vrij, 2005, 2008).”
Estimating the prevalence of deception in online review communities (2012, unknown): “deception literature as a truth bias [22].”
Criminal versus HUMINT Interrogations: The Importance of Psychological Science to Improving Interrogative Practice (2010, unknown): “However, a robust research literature exists on human lie detection performance (see Vrij, 2008) suggesting that individuals detect deception at only slightly greater than chance levels (54% on average; see Bond & DePaulo, 2006), and that trained investigators generally perform no better than naive…”
Nonverbal Dominance Versus Verbal Accuracy in Lie Detection (2008, methodology): “…receive a lower CBCA score than deceptive statements, but the procedure used in that study deviated in several important aspects from the procedure promoted by CBCA users, and Ruby and Brigham’s (1998) study is therefore not a fair test of the CBCA procedure (see Vrij, 2008, for details).”
A cognitive approach to lie detection: A meta‐analysis (2017, background): “This point of criticism does not just apply to the cognitive lie detection technique, every veracity assessment tool developed to date encounters this problem (Vrij, 2008).”