Nuevas aproximaciones en detección de mentiras I.antecedentes y marco teórico

  1. Masip Pallejá, Jaume
  2. Herrero Alonso, María Carmen
Aldizkaria:
Papeles del psicólogo

ISSN: 0214-7823 1886-1415

Argitalpen urtea: 2015

Alea: 36

Zenbakia: 2

Orrialdeak: 83-95

Mota: Artikulua

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Papeles del psicólogo

Laburpena

Deception detection research has traditionally assumed that when humans deceive they spontaneously display tell-tale behavioural indicators. However, recent meta-analytical integrations reveal that such indicators do not abound. This has produced a shift in deception research, which has taken two different directions: (a) the development of active interviewing strategies to detect deception, and (b) the use of contextual (rather than behavioural) indicators of deception. This paper is the first of two articles where we review this research. We begin by describing the traditional approaches, as well as the evidence that questions these approaches and justifies the shift in focus. We also argue that the new active interviewing approaches should be grounded on solid and coherent cognitive models. In the subsequent article (published in this same issue), specific interviewing strategies to detect deception will be described along with the contextual indicia approach.

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • Aamodt, M. G. y Custer, H. (2006). Who can best catch a liar? A meta-analysis of individual differences in detecting deception. The Forensic Examiner, 16, 6-11.
  • Alonso, H., Masip, J., Garrido, E. y Herrero, C. (2009). El entrenamiento de los policías para detectar mentiras. Estudios Penales y Criminológicos, 29, 7-60.
  • Blair, J. P. y Kooi, B. (2004). The gap between training and research in the detection of deception. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 6, 77-83.
  • Blair, J. P., Levine, T. R., Reimer, T. O. y McCluskey, J. D. (2012). The gap between reality and research. Another look at detecting deception in field settings. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 35, 723-740.
  • Blair, J. P., Levine, T. R. y Shaw, A. S. (2010). Content in context improves deception detection accuracy. Human Communication Research, 36, 423-442.
  • Blair, J. P. y McCamey, W. P. (2002). Detection of de- ception: An analysis of the Behavioral Analysis Interview technique. Illinois Law Enforcement Executive Forum, 2, 165-169.
  • Blandón-Gitlin, I., Fenn, E., Masip, J. y Yoo, A. (2014). Cognitive-load approaches to detect deception: Searching for cognitive mechanisms. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 441-444.
  • Bond, C. F., Jr. y DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214-234.
  • Bond, C. F., Jr. y DePaulo, B. M. (2008). Individual differences in judging deception: accuracy and bias. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 477-492.
  • Botella, J. y Gambara, H. (2006). Doing and reporting a meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 425-440.
  • Buller, D. B. y Burgoon, J. K. (1994). Deception: strategic and nonstrategic communication. En J. A. Daly y J. M. Wiemann (Eds.), Strategic interpersonal communication (pp. 191-223). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Chan, M. E. y Arvey, R. D. (2012). Meta-analysis and the development of knowledge. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 79-92.
  • Christ, S. E., Van Essen, D. C., Watson, J. M., Brubaker, L. E. y McDermott, K. B. (2009). The contributions of prefrontal cortex and executive control to deception: Evidence from activation likelihood estimate metaanalyses. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1557-1566.
  • Cooper, H. M. y Rosenthal, R. (1980). Statistical versus traditional procedures for summarizing research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 442-449.
  • Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics. Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Nueva York: Routledge.
  • Debey, E., Verschuere, B. y Crombez, G. (2012). Lying and executive control: An experimental investigation using ego depletion and goal neglect. Acta Psychologica, 140, 133-141.
  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K. y Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74-118.
  • DePaulo, B. M., Zuckerman, M. y Rosenthal, R. (1980a). Detecting deception: Modality effects. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 125-162.
  • DePaulo, B. M., Zuckerman, M. y Rosenthal, R. (1980b). Humans as lie detectors. Journal of Communication, 30, 129-139.
  • Ekman, P. (2009). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage. Nueva York: WW Norton & Company.
  • Ekman, P. y Friesen, W. V. (1969a). Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception. Psychiatry, 32, 88-106.
  • Ekman, P. y Friesen, W. V. (1969b). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49-98.
  • Farah, M. J., Hutchinson, J. B., Phelps, E. A. y Wagner, A. D. (2014). Functional MRI-based lie detection: scientific and societal challenges. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15, 123-131.
  • Fenn, E., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Coons, J., Pineda, C. y Echon, R. (2014). The inhibitory spillover effect: Controlling the bladder makes better liars. Manuscrito enviado para su publicación.
  • Frank, M. G. y Feeley, T. H. (2003). To catch a liar: Challenges for research in lie detection training. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 31, 58-75.
  • Frith, C. y Frith, U. (2005). Theory of mind. Current Biology, 15, R644-R645.
  • Global Deception Research Team (2006). A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37, 60-74.
  • Gombos, V. A. (2006). The cognition of deception: The role of executive processes in producing lies. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132, 197-214.
  • Granhag, P. A. y Mac Giolla, E. (2014). Preventing future crimes. Identifying markers of true and false intent. European Psychologist, 19, 195-206.
  • Hartwig, M., y Bond, C. F., Jr. (2011). Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 643-659.
  • Hauch, V., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Masip, J. y Sporer, S. L. (2014). Are computers effective lie detectors? A metaanalysis of linguistic cues to deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Publicación previa online.
  • Hauch, V., Sporer, S. L., Michael, S. W. y Meissner, C. A. (2014). Does training improve detection of deception? A meta-analysis. Communication Research. Publicación previa online.
  • Horvath, F., Blair, J. P. y Buckley, J. P. (2008). The beha- vioral analysis interview: Clarifying the practice, theory and understanding of its use and effectiveness. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 10, 101-118.
  • Horvath, F., Jayne, B. y Buckley, J. (1994). Differentiation of truthful and deceptive criminal suspects in Behavior Analysis Interviews. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 39, 793-807.
  • Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P. y Jayne, B. C.
  • (2013). Criminal interrogation and confessions (5ª ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
  • Inglehart, R., Basáñez, M., Díez-Medrano, J., Halman, L. y Luijkx, R. (2004). Human beliefs and values. A cross-cultural sourcebook based on the 1999-2002 values surveys. México, DF: Siglo XXI Editores.
  • Kassin, S. M. y Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 33-67.
  • Leo, R. A. y Drizin, S. A. (2010). The three errors: Pathways to false confession and wrongful conviction. En G. D. Lassiter and C. A. Meissner (Eds.), Police interrogations and false confessions. Current research, practice, and policy recommendations (pp. 9-30). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Levine, T. R. (2014). Active deception detection. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 122-128.
  • Lipsey, M. W. y Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical metaanalysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Lisofsky, N., Kazzer, P., Heekeren, H. y Prehn, K. (2014). Investigating socio-cognitive processes in deception: A quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Neuropsychologia, 61, 113-122.
  • Masip, J. (2005). ¿Se pilla antes a un mentiroso que a un cojo? Sabiduría popular versus conocimiento científico sobre la detección no-verbal del engaño. Papeles del Psicólogo, 26, 78-91
  • Masip, J., Alonso, H., Garrido, E. y Herrero, C. (2009). Training to detect what? The biasing effects of training on veracity judgments. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1282-1296.
  • Masip, J., Alonso, H. y Herrero, C. (2006). Verdades, mentiras y su detección a partir del comportamiento no-verbal. En E. Garrido, J. Masip y C. Herrero (Eds.), Psicología jurídica (pp. 475-505). Madrid: Pearson.
  • Masip, J., Barba, A. y Herrero, C. (2012). Behavior Analysis Interview and common sense. A study with novice and experienced officers. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 21-34.
  • Masip, J. y Garrido, E. (2000). La evaluación de la credibilidad del testimonio en contextos judiciales a partir de indicadores conductuales. Anuario de Psicología Jurídica, 10, 93-131.
  • Masip, J. y Garrido, E. (2006). La obtención de información mediante el interrogatorio del sospechoso. En E. Garrido, J. Masip y C. Herrero (Eds.), Psicología jurídica (pp. 339-380). Madrid: Pearson.
  • Masip, J. y Herrero, C. (2013). “What would you say if you were guilty?” Suspects’ strategies during a hypothetical Behavior Analysis Interview concerning a serious crime. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 60-70.
  • Masip, J. y Herrero, C. (2015). Police detection of deception: Beliefs about behavioral cues to deception are strong even though contextual evidence is more useful. Journal of Communication, 65, 125-145.
  • Masip, J., Herrero, C., Garrido, E. y Barba, A. (2011). Is the Behavior Analysis Interview just common sense? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 593-604.
  • McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K., Paik, J. E., Wisner, A. M. y Zhu, X. (2014). Information Manipulation Theory 2: A propositional theory of deceptive discourse production. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 348-377.
  • Park, H. S., Levine, T. R., McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K. y Ferrara, S. (2002). How people really detect lies. Communication Monographs, 69, 144-157.
  • Pérez, S. (1996). La prohibición de mentir. Espiral. Estudios sobre Estado y Sociedad, 2(6), 21-44.
  • Sánchez-Meca, J. y Botella, J. (2010). Revisiones sistemáticas y meta-análisis: Herramientas para la práctica profesional. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31, 7-17.
  • Sporer, S. L. y Schwandt, B. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 421-446.
  • Sporer, S. L. y Schwandt, B. (2007). Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13, 1-34.
  • Starr, D. (2013, 2 de Diciembre). The interview. Do police interrogation techniques produce false confessions? The New Yorker, pp. 42-49.
  • Strömwall, L., Granhag, P. A. y Hartwig, M. (2004). Practitioners’ beliefs about deception. En P.-A. Granhag y L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), Deception detection in forensic contexts (pp. 229-250). Cambridge, Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Bockstaele, B., Verschuere, B., Moens, T., Suchotzki, K., Debey, E. y Spruyt, A. (2012). Learning to lie: Effects of practice on the cognitive cost of lying. Frontiers in Psychology, 3.
  • Visu Petra, G., Miclea, M. y Visu Petra, L. (2012). Reaction time based detection of concealed information in relation to individual differences in executive functioning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 342-351.
  • Visu-Petra, G., Varga, M., Miclea, M. y Visu-Petra, L. (2013). When interference helps: Increasing executive
  • load to facilitate deception detection in the concealed information test. Frontiers in Psychology, 4.
  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. Chichester, Reino Unido: Wiley.
  • Vrij, A. y Granhag, P. A. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the question asked. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 110-117.
  • Vrij, A., Mann, S. y Fisher, R. P. (2006). An empirical test of the Behavior Analysis Interview. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 329-345.
  • Vrij, A., Mann, S., Fisher, R., Leal, S., Milne, B. y Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 253-265.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Griffith, D. A., Yates, R., Visconte, S. R., Simoneaux, B. y Harris, L. L. (2012). Lie detection by inducing cognitive load. Eye movements and other cues to the false answers of “witnesses” to crimes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 887-909.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Harris, L. L., Duck, T. K. y Mulay, F. (2014). A social-cognitive framework for understanding serious lies: Activation-decision-constructionaction theory. New Ideas in Psychology, 34, 22-36.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Igou, F. P., Dixon, A. P. y Tcholakian, T. (2013). Advancing lie detection by inducing cognitive load on liars: A review of relevant theories and techniques guided by lessons from polygraph-based approaches. Frontiers in psychology, 4.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Mahoney, K. T., Doverspike, D. y GriffithRoss, D. A. (2009). Cognitive lie detection: Response time and consistency of answers as cues to deception. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 33-49.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Roper, K. S., Seemann, E. y Humphrey, A. M. (2003). Cognitive mechanisms underlying lying to questions: Response time as a cue to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 755-774.
  • Walczyk, J. J., Schwartz, J. P., Clifton, R., Adams, B., Wei, M. y Zha, P. (2005). Lying person to person about life events: A cognitive framework for lie detection. Personnel Psychology, 58, 141-170.
  • Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M. y Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 1-59.
  • Zuckerman, M. y Driver, R. E. (1985). Telling lies: Verbal and nonverbal correlates of deception. En A. W. Siegman y S. Feldstein (Eds.), Multichannel integrations of nonverbal behavior (pp. 129-147). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.