The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts: Reality monitoring and detection of deception

By Siegfried L. Sporer. 2004

142 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Health Professions, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c7bf1667d41c10b08f9526f4e151b1081ede1105

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Aldert Vrij
2. R. Volbert
3. M. Steller

In General Health Professions

1. Aldert Vrij
2. R. Arce
3. R. Volbert
4. M. Steller

In Social Psychology

1. Bárbara G. Amado
2. R. Arce
3. Francisca Fariña
4. R. Volbert
5. M. Steller
6. Aldert Vrij
7. Maria Hartwig
8. S. Porter

Citations in the corpus

• Criminal versus HUMINT Interrogations: The Importance of Psychological Science to Improving Interrogative Practice (2010, unknown): “The most promising indicators of deception appear to involve cognitive or story-based cues (see Köhnken, 2004; Sporer, 2004; Vrij, 2005).”
• Is This Testimony Truthful, Fabricated, or Based on False Memory? (2014, background): “Sporer (2004) and Vrij (2008) have both already pointed to major overlaps between reality monitoring and CBCA criteria.”
• Nonverbal Dominance Versus Verbal Accuracy in Lie Detection (2008, background): “(See Vrij, 2005, 2008, for reviews of CBCA research and Masip, Sporer, Garrido, & Herrero, 2005; Sporer, 2004; Vrij, 2008, for reviews of RM research.)”
• Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review (2015, background): “…false positives and to ensure reliable coding (i.e., within-raters, between-raters, and between-context consistency), which would offset the potential effects of a truth bias or a response bias associated to the application of reality criteria (Griesel et al., 2013; Rassin, 1999; Sporer, 2004).”