Statement analysis

Last updated

Statement analysis is a technique used to determine whether a suspect is telling the truth or being deceptive based on linguistic indicators. The basic principles of statement analysis are straightforward: a suspect always reveals much more than they realize. Language moves so quickly that no one has complete control over what they say and try to conceal.

Contents

Unlike SCAN (Scientific Content Analysis), statement analysis offers higher accuracy and also assists in reconstructing events. This makes it particularly valuable in cold cases, where new hypotheses can be uncovered and investigated.

Statement Analysis lies at the intersection of linguistics, psychology, and criminology. By analyzing the specific words and phrases used by individuals, practitioners can detect concealed information, missing information, and embedded confessions, thereby determining the veracity of the information provided.

This method leverages the idea that linguistic patterns and subconscious cues in speech can provide insight into a person’s true intentions and knowledge about a given event. It is a tool utilized by investigators to gain deeper insights and make informed decisions during the investigative process. Statement Analysis has already proven successful in various cases, demonstrating its effectiveness as an investigative tool.

About

Related to statement analysis is a different technique for analyzing the words people use called "statement validity assessment" (SVA). The SVA is a tool that was originally designed to determine the credibility of child witnesses testimonies in trials for sexual offences. The "criteria-based content analysis" (CBCA) is a core component of the SVA and is a tool used to distinguish true statements from false statements as CBCA scores are expected to be higher for truth tellers than liars. [1] A qualitative review of the CBCA analyzed 37 studies, strong support for the tool was established as truth tellers obtained significantly higher CBCA scores compared to the liars. [2] More recently, a meta-analytic review found CBCA criteria to be a valid technique for discriminating between memories of real self-experienced events and invented or false accounts. [3]

Countries such as The Netherlands, Germany and Sweden use these techniques as scientific evidence in court. [1] However, countries such as the United States, Canada and the UK do not consider these techniques as legally valid evidence in court. [4] Studies have raised serious questions and concerns about the validity of CBCA for assessing the credibility of children's testimonies. One study using 114 children showed that CBCA scores were higher for the group of children describing a familiar event compared to the group of children describing an unfamiliar event. [5] The potential influence of familiarity on CBCA scores raises concerns about the validity of the tool for assessing credibility in children.

It has also been noted that the error rate of CBCA in the laboratory is high, that the error rate of SVA in practice is unknown and that the methodology continues to be disputed among the scientific community. [6] In conclusion, there is still great controversy surrounding the use of the SVA and many studies have investigated its core component, the CBCA, in order to determine its validity and reliability. More research is needed to conclude whether or not the information obtained from these tests should be admissible in court.

Example

Statement analysis involves an investigator searching for linguistic cues and gaps in a subject's testimony or preliminary statements. Ideally, the technique would guide investigators to ask follow-up questions to uncover discrepancies. The creator of Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), Avinoam Sapir, gives the example of someone saying, "I counted the money, put the bag on the counter, and proceeded to go home." Sapir says the statement was literally true:

He counted the money (when you steal you want to know how much you are stealing), and then the subject put the bag on the counter. The subject didn't say that he put the money back in the bag after counting it, because he didn't; he left the empty bag on the counter and walked away with the money. [7] [8]

Sapir says that a fundamental principle of statement analysis is that "denying guilt is not the same as denying the act. When one says 'I am not guilty' or 'I am innocent,' they are not denying the act; they are only denying guilt." Sapir claims that it is almost impossible for a guilty person to say "I didn't do it." He asserts that guilty people tend to speak in even greater circumlocutions by saying things like "I had nothing to do with it" or "I am not involved in that". [7] [8]

Criticism

Aldert Vrij, one of the leading authorities on detection of deception (DOD) techniques, points out that most studies of the technique did not rely on the ground truth being established and thus examiners could not be certain if "examinees were actually telling the truth or lying". [9] He also notes that there is no standardization among the different methods of analysis and this "implies that much depends on the subjective interpretation and skill of the individual" performing the analysis. Vrij attributes this to an absence of theoretical underpinning behind SCAN/statement analysis. [9] Vrij characterizes SCAN/statement analysis as weaker than CBCA because SCAN/statement analysis lacks "a set of cohesive criteria", being instead "a list of individual criteria". [9] Vrij argues that SCAN/statement analysis is best used as a technique to guide investigative interviews rather than as a "lie detection tool". [10]

Subsequent empirical studies have concurred with these findings, finding that SCAN/statement analysis techniques are applied inconsistently and are not reliable at detecting deceptive statements. [11] [12] [13] [14] The use of SCAN techniques has also been found to be vulnerable to contextual bias on the part of investigators. [15]

Critics argue that the technique encourages investigators to prejudge a suspect as deceptive and affirm a presumption of guilt before the interrogation process has even begun. Statement analysis in general has been criticized as "theoretically vague" with little or no empirical evidence in its favor, and SCAN in particular has been characterized as "junk science" [7] with the Skeptic's Dictionary and Skeptical Inquirer magazine [16] classifying it as a form of pseudoscience. [8] In 2016, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG), a federal agency group consisting of the FBI, the CIA, and the United States Department of Defense, released a report which found that studies commonly cited in favor of SCAN were scientifically flawed and that SCAN's evaluative criteria did not withstand scrutiny in laboratory testing. [17]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Truth serum</span> Class of psychoactive drug

"Truth serum" is a colloquial name for any of a range of psychoactive drugs used in an effort to obtain information from subjects who are unable or unwilling to provide it otherwise. These include ethanol, scopolamine, 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate, midazolam, flunitrazepam, sodium thiopental, and amobarbital, among others.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polygraph</span> Device that attempts to infer lying

A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test, is a junk science device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions. The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers; however, there are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying, making it difficult to identify factors that separate those who are lying from those who are telling the truth.

Deception is the act of convincing one or many recipients of untrue information. The person creating the deception knows it to be false while the receiver of the message has a tendency to believe it. It is often done for personal gain or advantage. Deception can involve dissimulation, propaganda and sleight of hand as well as distraction, camouflage or concealment. There is also self-deception. It can also be called, with varying subjective implications, beguilement, deceit, bluff, mystification, ruse, or subterfuge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interrogation</span> Interviews by police, military or intelligence personnel

Interrogation is interviewing as commonly employed by law enforcement officers, military personnel, intelligence agencies, organized crime syndicates, and terrorist organizations with the goal of eliciting useful information, particularly information related to suspected crime. Interrogation may involve a diverse array of techniques, ranging from developing a rapport with the subject to torture.

Validity is the main extent to which a concept, conclusion, or measurement is well-founded and likely corresponds accurately to the real world. The word "valid" is derived from the Latin validus, meaning strong. The validity of a measurement tool is the degree to which the tool measures what it claims to measure. Validity is based on the strength of a collection of different types of evidence described in greater detail below.

The Reid technique is a method of interrogation. The system was developed in the United States by John E. Reid in the 1950s. Reid was a polygraph expert and former Chicago police officer. The technique is known for creating a high pressure environment for the interviewee, followed by sympathy and offers of understanding and help, but only if a confession is forthcoming. Since its spread in the 1970s, it has been widely utilized by police departments in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul Ekman</span> American psychologist (born 1934)

Paul Ekman is an American psychologist and professor emeritus at the University of California, San Francisco who is a pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation to facial expressions. He was ranked 59th out of the 100 most cited psychologists of the twentieth century. Ekman conducted seminal research on the specific biological correlations of specific emotions, attempting to demonstrate the universality and discreteness of emotions in a Darwinian approach.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Microexpression</span> Innate result of voluntary, involuntary, and conflicting emotional responses

A microexpression is a facial expression that only lasts for a short moment. It is the innate result of a voluntary and an involuntary emotional response occurring simultaneously and conflicting with one another, and occurs when the amygdala responds appropriately to the stimuli that the individual experiences and the individual wishes to conceal this specific emotion. This results in the individual very briefly displaying their true emotions followed by a false emotional reaction.

Brain fingerprinting (BF) is a lie detection technique which uses brain waves from a electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether specific information is stored in the subject's cognitive memory. It was invented by Larry Farwell, a Harvard-graduated neuroscientist, and published in 1995. The technique involves presenting words, phrases, or pictures containing salient details about a crime on a computer screen, in a series with other, irrelevant stimuli to identify whether the suspect recognizes the crime-related items. Although brain fingerprinting has been used in investigations, the test results themselves can not be admitted as evidence in a legal trial.

Personnel selection is the methodical process used to hire individuals. Although the term can apply to all aspects of the process the most common meaning focuses on the selection of workers. In this respect, selected prospects are separated from rejected applicants with the intention of choosing the person who will be the most successful and make the most valuable contributions to the organization. Its effect on the group is discerned when the selected accomplish their desired impact to the group, through achievement or tenure. The procedure of selection takes after strategy to gather data around a person so as to figure out whether that individual ought to be utilized. The strategies used must be in compliance with the various laws in respect to work force selection.

A false confession is an admission of guilt for a crime which the individual did not commit. Although such confessions seem counterintuitive, they can be made voluntarily, perhaps to protect a third party, or induced through coercive interrogation techniques. When some degree of coercion is involved, studies have found that subjects with highly sophisticated intelligence or manipulated by their so-called "friends" are more likely to make such confessions. Young people are particularly vulnerable to confessing, especially when stressed, tired, or traumatized, and have a significantly higher rate of false confessions than adults. Hundreds of innocent people have been convicted, imprisoned, and sometimes sentenced to death after confessing to crimes they did not commit—but years later, have been exonerated. It was not until several shocking false confession cases were publicized in the late 1980s, combined with the introduction of DNA evidence, that the extent of wrongful convictions began to emerge—and how often false confessions played a role in these.

Lie detection is an assessment of a verbal statement with the goal to reveal a possible intentional deceit. Lie detection may refer to a cognitive process of detecting deception by evaluating message content as well as non-verbal cues. It also may refer to questioning techniques used along with technology that record physiological functions to ascertain truth and falsehood in response. The latter is commonly used by law enforcement in the United States, but rarely in other countries because it is based on pseudoscience.

The FBI method of profiling is a system created by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) used to detect and classify the major personality and behavioral characteristics of an individual based upon analysis of the crime or crimes the person committed.

Forensic developmental psychology is a field of psychology that focuses on "children's actions and reactions in a forensic context" and "children's reports that they were victims or witnesses of a crime". Bruck and Poole (2002) first coined the term "forensic developmental psychology". Although forensic developmental psychology specifically focuses on a child's reliability, credibility, and competency in the courtroom setting, it also includes topics such as autobiographical memory, memory distortion, eyewitness identification, narrative construction, personality, and attachment.

Character encoding detection, charset detection, or code page detection is the process of heuristically guessing the character encoding of a series of bytes that represent text. The technique is recognised to be unreliable and is only used when specific metadata, such as a HTTP Content-Type: header is either not available, or is assumed to be untrustworthy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Augustus Larson</span> American police officer and inventor (1892–1965)

John Augustus Larson was a police officer and forensic psychiatrist and became famous for his invention of the modern polygraph device used in forensic investigations. He was the first American police officer with an academic doctorate and to use the polygraph in criminal investigations. After a famed career in criminal investigation, he died of a heart attack in Nashville, Tennessee, at the age of 73.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interrogational torture</span> Use of torture to obtain information in interrogation

Interrogational torture is the use of torture to obtain information in interrogation, as opposed to the use of torture to extract a forced confession, regardless of whether it is true or false. Torture has been used throughout history during interrogation, although it is now illegal and a violation of international law.

Aldert Vrij is a professor of applied social psychology in the department of psychology at the University of Portsmouth in Portsmouth, England. His main area of expertise is utilizing nonverbal and verbal cues of deception, also called lie detection. Author of numerous research articles, Vrij has found that human beings can become more accurate judges of truth and deception not by passive observation of a speaker's verbal and nonverbal behavior but by tactically outsmarting liars through use of various techniques.

Daniel Langleben is an American psychiatrist, professor, and scientific researcher. He pioneered a technique for using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as a means of lie detection. He has also studied the brain effects of packaging and advertising and how infants' cuteness motivates caretaking in adults.

Truth-default theory (TDT) is a communication theory which predicts and explains the use of veracity and deception detection in humans. It was developed upon the discovery of the veracity effect - whereby the proportion of truths versus lies presented in a judgement study on deception will drive accuracy rates. This theory gets its name from its central idea which is the truth-default state. This idea suggests that people presume others to be honest because they either don't think of deception as a possibility during communicating or because there is insufficient evidence that they are being deceived. Emotions, arousal, strategic self-presentation, and cognitive effort are nonverbal behaviors that one might find in deception detection. Ultimately this theory predicts that speakers and listeners will default to use the truth to achieve their communicative goals. However, if the truth presents a problem, then deception will surface as a viable option for goal attainment.

References

  1. 1 2 Amado, Bárbara G., Ramón Arce, and Francisca Fariña. "Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review". The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context 7.1 (2015): 3–12.
  2. ↑ Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A Qualitative Review of the First 37 Studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11(1), 3.
  3. ↑ Amado, Bárbara G., Ramón Arce, and Francisca Fariña. "Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review". The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context 7.1 (2015): 3–12
  4. ↑ Pérez, Mercedes Novo, and María Dolores Seijo Martínez. "Judicial judgement-making and legal criteria of testimonial credibility". The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context 2.2 (2010): 9–115.
  5. ↑ Pezdek, Kathy, et al. "Detecting deception in children: event familiarity affects criterion-based content analysis ratings". Journal of Applied Psychology 89.1 (2004): 119
  6. ↑ Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A Qualitative Review of the First 37 Studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11(1), 3
  7. 1 2 3 Leo, Richard A. (2008). Police interrogation and American justice. Harvard University Press. ISBN   978-0-674-02648-3.
  8. 1 2 3 Carroll, Robert T. (2009-02-23). "L.S.I. SCAN - Too Good To Be True". The Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved 14 September 2010.
  9. 1 2 3 Aldert Vrij, Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities, 2nd ed., Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, 2008, p. 290.
  10. ↑ Aldert Vrij, Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities, 2nd ed., Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, 2008, p. 291.
  11. ↑ Bogaard, Glynis; Meijer, Ewout H.; Vrij, Aldert; Broers, Nick J.; Merckelbach, Harald (2014-05-28). "SCAN is largely driven by 12 criteria: results from sexual abuse statements". Psychology, Crime & Law. 20 (5): 430–449. doi:10.1080/1068316X.2013.793338. ISSN   1068-316X.
  12. ↑ Vrij, Aldert; Granhag, Pär Anders; Ashkenazi, Tzachi; Ganis, Giorgio; Leal, Sharon; Fisher, Ronald P. (2022-12-01). "Verbal Lie Detection: Its Past, Present and Future". Brain Sciences. 12 (12): 1644. doi: 10.3390/brainsci12121644 . ISSN   2076-3425. PMC   9775025 . PMID   36552104.
  13. ↑ Vanderhallen, Miet; Jaspaert, Emma; Vervaeke, Geert (2016-05-03). "SCAN as an investigative tool". Police Practice and Research. 17 (3): 279–293. doi:10.1080/15614263.2015.1008479. ISSN   1561-4263.
  14. ↑ Kleinberg, Bennett; Arntz, Arnoud; Verschuere, Bruno (2019-08-08). "Being accurate about accuracy in verbal deception detection". PLOS ONE. 14 (8): e0220228. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220228 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   6687387 . PMID   31393894.
  15. ↑ Bogaard, Glynis; Meijer, Ewout H.; Vrij, Aldert; Broers, Nick J.; Merckelbach, Harald (2013-10-29). "Contextual Bias in Verbal Credibility Assessment: Criteria‐Based Content Analysis, Reality Monitoring and Scientific Content Analysis". Applied Cognitive Psychology. 28 (1): 79–90. doi:10.1002/acp.2959. ISSN   0888-4080.
  16. ↑ "Statement Analysis Scan or Scam?", by Robert A. Shearer, Skeptical Inquirer, May/June 1999
  17. ↑ Armstrong, Ken; Sheckler, Christian (2019-12-07). "Why Are Cops Around the World Using This Outlandish Mind-Reading Tool?". The South Bend Tribune and ProPublica. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.