Who can best catch a liar?: A meta-analysis of individual differences in detecting deception.

327 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.

Deception Detection using Real-life Trial Data (2015, result): “Overall, our study indicates that detecting deception is indeed a difﬁcult task for humans and further veriﬁes previous ﬁndings where human ability to spot liars was found to be slightly better than chance [1].”
Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. (2007, background): “…federal law enforcement officers, federal polygraphers, robbery investigators, judges, law enforcement personnel, parole officers, and psychiatrists are no more skilled at detecting deception than the average observer (Aamodt & Custer, 2006; Bond & DePaulo, 2006; Ekman & O’Sullivan, 1991).”
Exploring Liars' Strategies for Creating Deceptive Reports (2013, background): “…engage in a similar constructive strategy (i.e., they also report from autobiographical memory) is telling and may contribute to the overall poor performance by observers in trying to distinguish between liars and truth tellers (e.g., see Aamodt & Custer, 2006; Bond & DePaulo, 2006; & Vrij, 2000).”