'Please tell me all you remember': a comparison between British and Arab interviewees' free narrative performance and its implications for lie detection.

We examined how much information British and Arab truth tellers and lie tellers volunteer in an initial free narrative. Based on cultural differences in communication styles we predicted that British interviewees would report more details and more complications than Arab interviewees (culture main effect). We further predicted that truth tellers would report more details and complications than lie tellers (veracity main effect), particularly in the British sample (Veracity × Culture interaction effect). A total of 78 British and 76 Israeli-Arab participants took part. The experiment was carried out at a British university and an Israeli university. Participants carried out a mission. Truth tellers were instructed to report the mission truthfully in a subsequent interview whereas lie tellers were asked to lie about certain aspects of the mission. The three hypotheses were supported for details, whereas for complications only the predicted veracity main effect occurred.

Applying the verifiability approach to deception detection in alibi witness situations.

The application of alibi witness scenarios to deception detection has been overlooked. Experiment 1 was a study of the verifiability approach in which truth-telling pairs completed a mission together, whereas in lying pairs one individual completed this mission alone and the other individual committed a mock theft. All pairs were instructed to convince the interviewer that they completed the mission together by writing individual statements on their own followed by a collective statement together as a pair. In the individual statements, truth-telling pairs provided more checkable details that demonstrated they completed the mission together than lying pairs, whereas lying pairs provided more uncheckable details than truth-telling pairs. The collective statements made truth-telling pairs provide significantly more checkable details that demonstrated they were together in comparison to the individual statements, whereas no effect was obtained for lying pairs. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves revealed high accuracy rates for discriminating between truths and lies using the verifiability approach across all statement types. Experiment 2 was a lie detection study whereby observers' abilities to discriminate between truths and lies using the verifiability approach were examined. This revealed that applying the verifiability approach to collective statements improved observers' ability to accurately detect deceit. We suggest that the verifiability approach could be used as a lie detection technique and that law enforcement policies should consider implementing collective interviewing.

Corrigendum: Detecting Deception within Small Groups: A Literature Review.

[This corrects the article on p. 1012 in vol. 7, PMID: 27445957.].

Detecting Deception within Small Groups: A Literature Review.

Investigators often have multiple suspects to interview in order to determine whether they are guilty or innocent of a crime. Nevertheless, co-offending has been significantly neglected within the deception detection literature. The current review is the first of its kind to discuss co-offending and the importance of examining the detection of deception within groups. Groups of suspects can be interviewed separately (individual interviewing) or simultaneously (collective interviewing) and these differing interviewing styles are assessed throughout the review. The review emphasizes the differences between lone individuals and groups. It focuses on the theoretical implications of group deceit and the reasons why groups need to be understood in terms of investigative interviewing and deception detection if all types of crime-related incidents are to be recognized and dealt with appropriately. Group strategies, consistency within- and between-statements, joint memory, and group dynamics are referred to throughout the review and the importance of developing interview protocols specifically for groups is discussed. The review concludes by identifying the gaps in the literature and suggesting ideas for future research, highlighting that more research is required if we are to obtain a true understanding of the deception occurring within groups and how best to detect it.

Observer Ratings of Interpersonal Behavior as Predictors of Aggression and Self-Harm in a High-Security Sample of Male Forensic Inpatients.

Incidents of aggression and self-harm in forensic mental health inpatient settings present a significant challenge to practitioners in terms of safely managing and reducing the harm they cause. Research has been conducted to explore the possible predictors of these incidents and has identified a range of environmental, situational, and individual risk factors. However, despite the often interpersonal nature of the majority of aggressive incidents, few studies have investigated forensic inpatient interpersonal styles as predictors of aggression and even fewer have explored the potential interpersonal function of self-harming behaviors. The current study investigated the predictive validity of the Chart of Interpersonal Reactions in Closed Living Environments (CIRCLE) for incidents of verbal and physical aggression, and self-harm recorded from 204 high-secure forensic inpatients. Means comparisons, correlations, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) were conducted on recorded incident data at 12, 24, and 48 months following baseline assessment using the CIRCLE. Dominant and coercive interpersonal styles were significant predictors of aggression, and a coercive interpersonal style was a significant predictor of self-harm, over the recorded time periods. When categorizing the inpatients on the basis of short- and long-term admissions, these findings were only replicated for inpatients with shorter lengths of stay. The findings support previous research which has demonstrated the benefits of assessing interpersonal style for the purposes of risk planning and management of forensic inpatients. The predictive value may be time-limited in terms of stage of admission.