An Empirical Test of the Behaviour Analysis Interview.

Aldert Vrij · Samantha Ann Mann · Ronald P. Fisher

141 citations0/0 files storedLaw and Human Behavior

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Deception detection and forensic psychology Memory Processes and Influences Torture, Ethics, and Law

Abstract

The present experiment is the first empirical test of the Behaviour Analysis Interview (BAI), an interview technique developed by F. E. Inbau, J. E. Reid, J. P. Buckley, & B. C. Jayne (2001) designed to evoke different verbal and non-verbal responses from liars and truth-tellers. Inbau et al. expect liars to be less helpful than truth-tellers in investigations and to exhibit more nervous behaviours. Just the opposite predictions, however, follow from the deception literature, which notes that liars take their credibility less for granted and are therefore more aware of their responses and their impact on others. This suggests that liars' answers should be more helpful than truth-tellers' answers, and liars' non-verbal responses should appear more relaxed than truth-tellers' non-verbal responses. In the present experiment, 40 participants (undergraduate students) lied or told the truth about an event during a BAI interview. The interviews were coded according to Inbau et al.'s guidelines. The results showed that, compared to liars, truth-tellers (a) were more naive and evasive when explaining the purpose of the interview, and (b) were less likely to name someone who they felt certain did not commit the crime. Truth-tellers also exhibited more nervous behaviours. The results were consistent with the predictions of the deception literature, and directly opposed to the predictions of BAI.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 141 citations exist upstream.

References

1996Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients.2003Cues to deception.1985Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage 2003The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions: A Handbook 2000Detecting Lies and Deceit: The Psychology of Lying and the Implications for Professional Practice 2005Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A Qualitative Review of the First 37 Studies.1963Criminal Interrogation and Confessions 2002"He's guilty!": Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception.

Cited by

2018TI-CNN: Convolutional Neural Networks for Fake News Detection 2014Strategic Use of Evidence During Investigative Interviews 2010‘Look into my eyes’: can an instruction to maintain eye contact facilitate lie detection?2008Decision support for determining veracity via linguistic-based cues 2010Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex specifically processes general – but not personal – knowledge deception: Multiple brain networks for lying

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.