Examining police offi cers’ response bias in judging veracity

• Jaume Masip ^[1] ; Carmen Herrero ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Salamanca

     Universidad de Salamanca

     Salamanca, España

     
• Localización: Psicothema, ISSN-e 1886-144X, ISSN 0214-9915, Vol. 29, Nº. 4, 2017, págs. 490-495
• Idioma: inglés
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Examen del sesgo de respuesta de los policías al juzgar la veracidad
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo  1 (pdf)   2  
• Dialnet Métricas: 2 Citas
• Resumen
  • español

    Antecedentes: la investigación muestra que al juzgar la veracidad los policías presentan un menor sesgo de veracidad que los no-policías.

    Normalmente, los investigadores han venido usando declaraciones en vídeo con emisores que muestran diversas claves estereotípicas o reales de la mentira. En este estudio examinamos las tendencias de respuesta de no-policías, policías nuevos y policías con experiencia cuando la disponibilidad de claves está limitada. Método: empleamos breves descripciones de situaciones policialmente relevantes o irrelevantes en las que el protagonista negaba haber cometido una mala acción. Cada texto contenía solo dos unidades relevantes de información: una que sugería que el protagonista mentía y otra que sugería que decía la verdad.

    Resultados: los policías hicieron menos juicios de verdad que los nopolicías al juzgar situaciones policialmente relevantes, pero no al juzgar situaciones policialmente irrelevantes. Además, tanto los policías nuevos como los experimentados mostraron más confi anza en sus juicios que los no-policías. Conclusión: los hallazgos son consistentes con la Teoría de la Detección de Mentiras Adaptativa. La investigación futura debe seguir explorando la infl uencia de la relevancia policial de la situación o tarea sobre los juicios de veracidad de policías nuevos y veteranos

  • English

    Background: Deception detection research has shown that, in judging veracity, police offi cers are less truth biased than non-offi cers. However, previous researchers have normally used videotaped statements where an unknown (but presumably large) number of stereotypical or real deception cues are displayed by the senders. We examined non-offi cers, novice offi cers, and experienced offi cers’ response tendencies in a more controlled situation where cue availability was severely restricted. Method: We used written vignettes describing either police-related or police-unrelated scenarios where the protagonist denied having committed a misdeed. Each vignette contained only two pieces of relevant information, one suggesting that the protagonist was lying and one suggesting that she or he was telling the truth. Results: Offi cers made fewer truth judgments than non-offi cers in judging police-relevant vignettes, but not in judging police-irrelevant vignettes. Both novice and experienced offi cers had greater judgmental confi dence than non-offi cers. Conclusions: The fi ndings are consistent with the Adaptive Lie Detection Theory (ALIED). Future research should continue to explore how the police relevance of the situation or task at hand infl uences novice and experienced offi cers’ veracity judgments.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Bond, C. F., Jr., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214-234. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2
  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin,...
  • Hartwig, M., & Bond, C. F. Jr. (2011). Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments. Psychological Bulletin,...
  • Hauch, V., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Masip, J., & Sporer, S. L. (2015). Are computers effective lie detectors? A meta-analysis of linguistic...
  • Hensel, J. P. (1980). The purposes of laboratory experimentation and the virtues of deliberate artificiality. Journal of Experimental Social...
  • Levine, T. R., & McCornack, S. A. (1991). The dark side of trust: Conceptualizing and measuring types of communicative suspicion. Communication...
  • Levine, T. R., Park, H. S., & McCornack, S. A. (1999). Accuracy in detecting truths and lies: Documenting the “veracity effect”. Communication...
  • Masip, J. (2014). Investigator bias. In T. Levine (Ed.), Encyclopedia of deception (Vol. 2, pp. 538-540). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Masip, J., Alonso, H., Herrero, C., & Garrido, E. (2016). Experienced and novice officers’ Generalized Communication Suspicion and veracity...
  • Masip, J., Garrido, E., Herrero, C., Antón, C., & Alonso, H. (2006). Officers as lie detectors. Guilty before charged. In D. Chadee &...
  • Meissner, C. A., & Kassin, S. M. (2002). “He’s guilty!”: Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law and Human Behavior,...
  • Mook, D. G. (1983). In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist, 16, 185-193. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.38.4.379
  • Nahari, G. (2012). Elaborations on credibility judgments by professional lie detectors and laypersons: Strategies of judgment and justification....
  • Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis...
  • Sporer, S. L., & Schwandt, B. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20,...
  • Sporer, S. L., & Schwandt, B. (2007). Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy,...
  • Street, C. N. H. (2015). ALIED: Humans as adaptive lie detectors. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 335-343. doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.06.002
  • Street, C. N. H., Bischof, W. F., Vadillo, M. A., & Kingstone, A. (2016). Inferring others’ hidden thoughts: Smart guesses in a low diagnostic...
  • Street, C. N. H., & Richardson, D. C. (2015). The focal account: Indirect lie detection need not access unconscious, implicit knowledge....
  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit. Pitfalls and opportunities. Chichester, UK: Wiley.