ABSTRACT
Most deception detection research looks at the deception about past events (e.g., a crime). From an applied perspective, it is often more relevant to focus on the identification of those people who might have malicious intent regarding an event in the future (e.g., planning an attack). The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview of possibilities for large-scale applications to detecting deceptive intentions. We outline a set of criteria that an applied system should meet from a practitioner’s perspective to evaluate deception theories, interviewing approaches, information elicitation methods, and verbal deception cues that may be of use for large-scale applications for prospective airport passenger screening. Our review indicates that (i) the cognition-based deception theory, (ii) the information-gathering interviewing approach, (iii) the unanticipated questions method and the model statement technique, and (iv) verbal cues, especially the verifiability of details and stylometric cues, are most the promising. We conclude this chapter with an illustration of how this combination of elements can be operationalized.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Airports Council International. (2016). Year to date passenger traffic, December 2015. Retrieved from http://www.aci.aero/Data-Centre/Monthly-Traffic-Data/Passenger-Summary/Year-to-date.
Bachenko, J., Fitzpatrick, E., & Schonwetter, M. (2008). Verification and implementation of language-based deception indicators in civil and criminal narratives. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics—Volume 1 (pp. 41–48). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1599087.
Bogaard, G., Meijer, E. H., & Vrij, A. (2014). Using an example statement increases information but does not increase accuracy of CBCA, RM, and SCAN: Using an example statement with truth tellers and liars. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling,11(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1409.
Booth, R. (2013). Fake bomb detector conman jailed for 10 years. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/02/fake-bomb-detector-conman-jailed.
Brackmann, N., Otgaar, H., Roos af Hjelmsäter, E., & Sauerland, M. (2017). Testing a new approach to improve recall in different ages: Providing witnesses with a model statement. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3(2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000116.
Debey, E., Verschuere, B., & Crombez, G. (2012). Lying and executive control: An experimental investigation using ego depletion and goal neglect. Acta Psychologica,140(2), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.03.004.
DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin,129(1), 74–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74.
Ekman, P. (2009). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage (4th ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.
Evans, J. R., Houston, K. A., Meissner, C. A., Ross, A. B., LaBianca, J. R., Woestehoff, S. A., & Kleinman, S. M. (2014). An Empirical Evaluation of Intelligence-gathering Interrogation Techniques from the United States Army Field Manual: Intelligence-gathering interrogation techniques. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(6), 867–875. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3065.
Evans, J. R., Michael, S. W., Meissner, C. A., & Brandon, S. E. (2013). Validating a new assessment method for deception detection: Introducing a psychologically based credibility assessment tool. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,2(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.02.002.
Feng, V. W., & Hirst, G. (2013). Detecting deceptive opinions with profile compatibility. In IJCNLP (pp. 338–346). Retrieved from ftp://128.100.3.31/dist/gh/Feng+Hirst-IJCNLP-2013.pdf.
Fenn, E., McGuire, M., Langben, S., & Blandón-Gitlin, I. (2015). A reverse order interview does not aid deception detection regarding intentions. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553365/.
Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
Fisher, R. P., Geiselman, R. E., & Amador, M. (1989). Field test of the cognitive interview: Enhancing the recollection of actual victims and witnesses of crime. Journal of Applied Psychology,74(5), 722–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.5.722.
Fitzpatrick, E., Bachenko, J., & Fornaciari, T. (2015). Automatic detection of verbal deception (Vol. 8). Morgan & Claypool Publishers. Retrieved from http://www.morganclaypool.com/doi/abs/10.2200/S00656ED1V01Y201507HLT029.
Fornaciari, T., & Poesio, M. (2013). Automatic deception detection in Italian court cases. Artificial Intelligence and Law,21(3), 303–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-013-9140-4.
Fornaciari, T., & Poesio, M. (2014). Identifying fake Amazon reviews as learning from crowds. Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://repository.essex.ac.uk/id/eprint/14591.
Gallini, B. (2010). Police “science” in the interrogation room: Seventy years of pseudo-psychological interrogation methods to obtain inadmissible confessions. Hastings Law Journal, 61, 529–577. https://scholarworks.uark.edu/lawpub/29/.
Granhag, P. A., Vrij, A., & Meissner, C. A. (2014). Information gathering in law enforcement and intelligence settings: Advancing theory and practice: Effective human intelligence gathering techniques. Applied Cognitive Psychology,28(6), 815–816. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3093.
Harvey, A. C., Vrij, A., Nahari, G., & Ludwig, K. (2017). Applying the verifiability approach to insurance claims settings: Exploring the effect of the information protocol. Legal and Criminological Psychology,22(1), 47–59.
High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group. (2016). Interrogation best practices report. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/hig-report-august-2016.pdf/view.
Honts, C., & Hartwig, M. (2014). Credibility assessment at portals. In D. C. Raskin, C. Honts, & J. Kircher (Eds.), Credibility assessment: Scientific research and applications (pp. 37–62). San Diego: Academic Press.
Inbau, F. E. (Ed.). (2013). Criminal interrogation and confessions (5th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Johnson, M. K., Bush, J. G., & Mitchell, K. J. (1998). Interpersonal reality monitoring: Judging the sources of other people’s memories. Social Cognition,16(2), 199–224.
Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review,88(1), 67–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.67.
Jupe, L. M., Leal, S., Vrij, A., & Nahari, G. (2017). Applying the verifiability approach in an international airport setting. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23(8), 812–825. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1327584.
Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions, risk factors, and recommendations: Looking ahead. Law and Human Behavior,34(1), 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-010-9217-5.
Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,5(2), 33–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00016.x.
Kleinberg, B., Mozes, M., Arntz, A., & Verschuere, B. (2018). Using named entities for computer-automated verbal deception detection. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 63(3), 714–723. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13645.
Kleinberg, B., Nahari, G., Arntz, A., & Verschuere, B. (2017). An investigation on the detectability of deceptive intent about flying through verbal deception detection. Collabra: Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.80.
Kleinberg, B., Nahari, G., & Verschuere, B. (2016). Using the verifiability of details as a test of deception: A conceptual framework for the automation of the verifiability approach. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT (pp. 18–25). Retrieved from http://www.anthology.aclweb.org/W/W16/W16-0803.pdf.
Leal, S., Vrij, A., Warmelink, L., Vernham, Z., & Fisher, R. P. (2015). You cannot hide your telephone lies: Providing a model statement as an aid to detect deception in insurance telephone calls. Legal and Criminological Psychology,20(1), 129–146.
Levine, T. R., Blair, J. P., & Carpenter, C. J. (2018). A critical look at meta-analytic evidence for the cognitive approach to lie detection: A re-examination of Vrij, Fisher, and Blank (2017). Legal and Criminological Psychology, 23(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12115.
Loney, D. M., & Cutler, B. L. (2016). Coercive interrogation of eyewitnesses can produce false accusations. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,31(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-015-9165-6.
Luyckx, K., & Daelemans, W. (2008). Authorship attribution and verification with many authors and limited data. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 513–520). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Mac Giolla, E., Granhag, P. A., & Vrij, A. (2014). Discriminating between true and false intentions. In P. A. Granhag, A. Vrij, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Detecting deception (pp. 155–173). Chichester, UK: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118510001.ch7.
Masip, J., Sporer, S. L., Garrido, E., & Herrero, C. (2005). The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: A review of the empirical evidence. Psychology, Crime & Law,11(1), 99–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160410001726356.
Meijer, E. H., & Verschuere, B. (2010). The polygraph and the detection of deception. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice,10(4), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2010.481237.
Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A. D., Michael, S. W., Evans, J. R., Camilletti, C. R., Bhatt, S., et al. (2014). Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology,10(4), 459–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-014-9207-6.
Memon, A., Meissner, C. A., & Fraser, J. (2010). The cognitive interview: A meta-analytic review and study space analysis of the past 25 years. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,16(4), 340–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020518.
Mihalcea, R., & Strapparava, C. (2009). The lie detector: Explorations in the automatic recognition of deceptive language. In Proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP 2009 Conference Short Papers (pp. 309–312). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1667679.
Morris, S., Jones, M., & Booth, R. (2013). The “magic” bomb detector that endangered lives all over the world. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/23/magic-bomb-detector-lives-risk.
Nahari, G., Leal, S., Vrij, A., Warmelink, L., & Vernham, Z. (2014). Did somebody see it? Applying the verifiability approach to insurance claim interviews: The verifiability approach in insurance interviews. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling,11(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1417.
Nahari, G., & Vrij, A. (2014). Are you as good as me at telling a story? Individual differences in interpersonal reality monitoring. Psychology, Crime & Law,20(6), 573–583.
Nahari, G., Vrij, A., & Fisher, R. P. (2014a). Exploiting liars’ verbal strategies by examining the verifiability of details. Legal and Criminological Psychology,19(2), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02069.x.
Nahari, G., Vrij, A., & Fisher, R. P. (2014b). The verifiability approach: Countermeasures Facilitate its ability to discriminate between truths and lies: The verifiability approach and countermeasures. Applied Cognitive Psychology,28(1), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2974.
Oberlader, V. A., Naefgen, C., Koppehele-Goseel, J., Quinten, L., Banse, R., & Schmidt, A. F. (2016). Validity of content-based techniques to distinguish true and fabricated statements: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior,40(4), 440–457.
Ormerod, T. C., & Dando, C. J. (2015). Finding a needle in a haystack: Toward a psychologically informed method for aviation security screening. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,144(1), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000030.
Ott, M., Cardie, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2013). Negative deceptive opinion spam. In HLT-NAACL (pp. 497–501). Retrieved from http://www.aclweb.org/website/old_anthology/N/N13/N13-1.pdf#page=535.
Ott, M., Choi, Y., Cardie, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Finding deceptive opinion spam by any stretch of the imagination. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies—Volume 1 (pp. 309–319). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2002512.
Panasiti, M. S., Cardone, D., Pavone, E. F., Mancini, A., Merla, A., & Aglioti, S. M. (2016). Thermal signatures of voluntary deception in ecological conditions. Scientific Reports, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35174.
Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Retrieved from https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/31333.
Perry, M., & Gilbey, A. (2011). The screening of passengers by observation techniques programme. Aviation Security International,17(3), 12.
Schler, J., Koppel, M., Argamon, S., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2006). Effects of age and gender on blogging. In AAAI Spring Symposium: Computational Approaches to Analyzing Weblogs (Vol. 6, pp. 199–205).
Schubert, S. (2006). A look tells all. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-look-tells-all.
Shaw, D. J., Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S., Hillman, J., Granhag, P. A., et al. (2013). Expect the unexpected? Variations in question type elicit cues to deception in joint interviewer contexts. Applied Cognitive Psychology,27(3), 336–343.
Sooniste, T., Granhag, P. A., Knieps, M., & Vrij, A. (2013). True and false intentions: Asking about the past to detect lies about the future. Psychology, Crime & Law,19(8), 673–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2013.793333.
Sooniste, T., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Vrij, A. (2015). Statements about true and false intentions: Using the cognitive interview to magnify the differences. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology,56(4), 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12216.
Soukara, S., Bull, R., Vrij, A., Turner, M., & Cherryman, J. (2009). What really happens in police interviews of suspects? Tactics and confessions. Psychology, Crime & Law,15(6), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160802201827.
Swanner, J. K., Meissner, C. A., Atkinson, D. J., & Dianiska, R. E. (2016). Developing diagnostic, evidence-based approaches to interrogation. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,5(3), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.07.001.
Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Vrij, A. (2016). Baselining as a lie detection method: Baselining. Applied Cognitive Psychology,30(6), 1112–1119. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3288.
Vrij, A., Blank, H., & Fisher, R. P. (2018). A re-analysis that supports our main results: A reply to Levine et al. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 23(1), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12121.
Vrij, A., & Fisher, R. P. (2016). Which lie detection tools are ready for use in the criminal justice system? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,5(3), 302–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.06.014.
Vrij, A., Fisher, R. P., & Blank, H. (2017). A cognitive approach to lie detection: A meta-analysis. Legal and Criminological Psychology,22(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12088.
Vrij, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,1(2), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.02.004.
Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2011). Lying about flying: The first experiment to detect false intent. Psychology, Crime & Law,17(7), 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160903418213.
Vrij, A., Granhag, P. A., & Porter, S. (2010). Pitfalls and opportunities in nonverbal and verbal lie detection. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,11(3), 89–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100610390861.
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Hillman, J., et al. (2009). Outsmarting the liars: The benefit of asking unanticipated questions. Law and Human Behavior,33(2), 159–166.
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Mann, S. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2011). A comparison between lying about intentions and past activities: Verbal cues and detection accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology,25(2), 212–218.
Vrij, A., Mann, S. A., Fisher, R. P., Leal, S., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and Human Behavior,32(3), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9103-y.
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., & Granhag, P. A. (2013a). Spatial and temporal details in intentions: A cue to detecting deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology,27(1), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2878.
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., & Granhag, P. A. (2013b). Spatial and temporal details in intentions: A cue to detecting deception: Spatial and temporal details in lie detection. Applied Cognitive Psychology,27(1), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2878.
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Jundi, S., & Granhag, P. A. (2012). The effect of question expectedness and experience on lying about intentions. Acta Psychologica,141(2), 178–183.
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., Forrester, D., & Fisher, R. P. (2011). Thermal imaging as a lie detection tool at airports. Law and Human Behavior,35(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-010-9251-3.
Warmelink, L., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Leal, S., & Poletiek, F. H. (2013). The effects of unexpected questions on detecting familiar and unfamiliar lies. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law,20(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2011.619058.
Wilgoren, J., & Wong, E. (2001). After the attacks: United flight 93; On doomed flight, passengers vowed to perish fighting. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/13/us/after-attacks-united-flight-93-doomed-flight-passengers-vowed-perish-fighting.html.
Yarkoni, T., & Westfall, J. (2017). Choosing prediction over explanation in psychology: Lessons from machine learning. Perspectives on Psychological Science,12(6), 1100–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617693393.
Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,14, 1–59.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kleinberg, B., Arntz, A., Verschuere, B. (2019). Detecting Deceptive Intentions: Possibilities for Large-Scale Applications. In: Docan-Morgan, T. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Deceptive Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96334-1_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96334-1_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96333-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96334-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)