1. “This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

2.  A. Previous studies have almost exclusively been done in the lab  1. These designs typically involved asking a participant to lie or tell the truth about various issues.  2. Ps of previous studies were told to fabricate lies so that they fit into the objective of the whatever they were studying ▪ Such issues included personal facts, films, pictures, etc. ▪ Ekman et al. (1991) study of Ps describing a film  3. Up to this study, it was difficult to conduct field research into nonverbal behaviors that actually accompany deception (lies) CUE1- From the Ekman PDF, summarize the purpose, procedure, and main findings in 2 paragraphs CUE 2- What has previous research into deception revealed with regards to one’s behavior? CUE3- Why has it been difficult to conduct field research on the topic?

3.  B. Issues with lab-based research into the topic of deception  1. The Ps have been asked to lie, thus the Ps had no need to feel guilty about deceiving the target (other Ps)  2. The Ps would have been aware of being videotaped to enable the Es to review the deceptive behavior (and thus may have acted differently)  3. Previous research has been based on Ps telling lies of negligible consequences (just a study, not a real situation)  4. As a result of this, Mann et al believe that there remains the possibility that in high-stakes situations (not like the lab ones above), liars do exhibit nervous behaviors that most people associate with deception (like avoiding eye contact & fidgeting around)

4.  C. Foundation for the Study  1. In a previous study, Vrij and Mann (2001) examined videotapes of a murderer when he was questioned by the police regarding his crime. ▪ a. The suspect initially denied committing the crime, but after the evidence against him was displayed, he finally confessed  2.The study gave valuable insight into a genuine, high-stakes liar in an authentic situation  3. However, the severity of the situation did not increase behaviors associated with nervousness while lying for the murderer (and thus may not for others as well)  4. The 2002 study extends this 2001 work to 16 Ps

5.  D. Cognitive Load  1. Theory stating that our working memory is limited with respect to (a) the amount of information it can hold (b) the number of operations it can perform on that information  2. Mann et al (2002) wanted to see if cognitive load increases behaviors typically associated with lying (fidgeting, blinking, etc)  3. Previous research has shown that when people engage in cognitively complex tasks: ▪ a. They make fewer hand movements, including talking with hands and scratching/rubbing ▪ b. They do not pay attention to their body language ▪ c. They may have increased speech disturbances & longer pauses b/w words ▪ d. They blink their eyes less than normal

6. A. The primary aim of the study was to determine if there are systematic behavioral indicators to distinguish between times when someone is telling genuine lies and truths during high-stakes situations B. The secondary aim was to determine if cognitive load causes changes in behavior related to lying or telling the truth

7.  A. The Es noted that even in high-stakes situations, the presence of nervous behaviors is not guaranteed to be visible  B. However, they hypothesized that they would find evidence of behavior consistent with cognitive load and/or attempted behavioral control (as noted below)  Liars will make fewer movements (such as hand movements)  Liars will display more speech disturbances & longer pauses  Liars will blink their eyes less often  C. Also, researchers hypothesized that within each individual, there would be substantial consistencies and did not believe that there would be a tell-tale sign of deception that would be applicable to all Ps

8.  A. Type of Study  “Natural Experiment” with so-called ‘naturalistic’ observation of suspects in police custody ▪ IV= truths and lies of the suspects (Ps) ▪ DV= behavior shown by suspects (Ps) that was videotaped (and later observed and categorized)- 8 categories listed below ▪ Gaze aversion (# of sec. participant looked away from the interviewer) ▪ Blinking (frequency of eye blinks) ▪ Head movements (frequency of head nods) ▪ Self manipulations (scratching of head, wrist, etc) ▪ Illustrators (hand movements while talking) ▪ Hand/finger movements ▪ Speech disturbances (“um”s, repetition of words, etc) ▪ Pauses (between words while talking) CUE4- What other behaviors do you think could have been examined while investigating this?

9.  B. Setting  Police evidence gathered at Kent County Constabulary (UK)  For privacy issues, videos were most likely viewed at the station  C. Sample  Can be considered an opportunity and self-selecting  N= 16 suspects (13M:3F) ages 13-65, 4 juvies (3 @age 13, 1@age15)  15 Caucasian and 1 Asian (English 2 nd fluent language)  Suspected of crimes of theft (9), arson (2), rape (1), and murder (4)  10 of the suspects were “well known” as they have previously been interviewed for past crimes CUE5- Describe a strength & a weakness of this sample

10. “This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

11.  D. Procedure  1. The detectives were asked to remember videotaped interviews in which they were involved and where the suspect had lied at one point and told the truth at another ▪ Once these were identified, the researchers looked for evidence to corroborate instances of truths and lies ▪ Cases without such evidence were eliminated ▪ From the chosen cases, these video clips were copied onto the video used for the experiment ▪ Resulted in an hour long of clips of 16 suspects  2. The truths that were selected were chosen to be as comparable as possible in nature to the lies

12.  3. The number of clips from each participant varied depending on how many examples of truths and lies there were during the interviews ▪ Total of 65 clips= 27 of them were truths, 38 were lies ▪ For each suspect, there was a minimum of 2 clips (1 truth/1 lie) and a maximum of 8 clips. ▪ Length of the clips varied from 5 to 146 seconds ▪ Total length of clips per participant: 41 to 368 seconds ▪ The number of truth & lie clips was in accordance with number of times the police officers were absolutely certain the participant was lying or telling the truth, and for how long

13.  4. Reviewing and Coding the Behaviors ▪ Two observers independently coded the 8 behaviors ▪ Coding system was one that has previously been used in multiple studies ▪ Raters were not informed of the hypotheses of the study or the nature of the clips ▪ Raters were also blind to the veracity (truth or lie) of the clips they were observing ▪ Rater 1 coded all clips & Rater 2 coded a random sample of 36 clips ▪ For reliability, clips that Coder 2 rated included 1 from each of the 16 suspects ▪ Very high inter-rater reliability results for each of the 8 behaviors CUE6- Why did Rater 2 only code the random sample? CUE7: Provide the inter-rater reliability statistic for each of the 8 behaviors in the study CUE8: Explain how each of the coded behaviors were transformed into a format that enabled the truths and the lies to be directly compared (there are 4 parts BTW)

14.  These are not true weaknesses, but they help to frame how the study should be viewed- these aspects were out of the control of the researchers  1. Different interviewers were used for different suspects  2. More than one interviewer was present for some interviews  3. The total number of present people varied ▪ a. Fluctuated based upon the number of police interviewing, presence of attorneys, presence of parent if suspect was a minor, etc.  Though these factors potentially could influence a suspect’s behavior and thus the results, the use of a within factor design during statistical analysis helped to mostly eliminate these factors

15.  A. For analytical purposes, the 8 categories were condensed into 6  Self-manipulation & illustrators were combined into the hand/arm movement  MANOVA was used with veracity (truth/lie) compared to each behavior ▪ At the multivariate level, analysis was significant overall ▪ Specifically, lying behavior was significant with ‘decrease in blinking’ & ‘increase in pauses’ ▪ Below is the average occurrence of each of the 6 behaviors ultimately analyzed

16.  B. Overall Findings  1. As expected, individual differences in behavior (lies/truths) did occur  2. As expected, there was not a behavior that all liars exhibited  3. No difference was found for head movements & speech disturbances ▪ Overall showed a 50% increase or 50% decrease while lying  4. No difference was found for gaze aversion (making eye contact) ▪ 56% showed more gaze aversion and 44% showed less gaze aversion while lying  5. Supporting previous studies, more suspects (69%) showed a decrease in hand and arm movements while lying  6. As noted before, the most reliable indicators of deception were a decrease in blinking and an increase in pauses while talking ▪ Both of these were shown by 81% of suspects

17.  A. Cognitive load may have influenced the results  1. The significant findings of decreased blinking & increased pausing can be more related to the cognitive load (rather than nervousness) of a suspect during such high-stakes situations  2. Previous research showed that increased cognitive load results in a decrease in eye blinking  3. The researchers can not say for sure that cognitive load was a factor as it was not measured in the study however  B. The study challenges the simplistic view that deceptive behaviors are mostly universal (of fidgeting & avoiding eye contact)  1. The findings that (a) individual differences exist and that (b) there was not a common behavior exhibited by the suspects goes against beliefs of some professional lie catchers CUE9- Note the professionals who the Es referred to

18.  Strengths of the Study  High ecological validity- true suspects in real life situations  Use of inter-rater reliability of recorded subject matter  Researchers used clips that were selected for analysis by set criteria  Use of quantitative data/statistics to eliminate extraneous variables  Weaknesses of the Study  Limitations as previously discussed  Small sample from the UK (not generalizable)  Unequal number of lying/true clips (38L:27T)  Ethics  Questionable- Ps not informed that their content may be part of an psychological investigation  Different guidelines for RTW, consent, etc

19.  CUE10- AICE-STYLE QUESTION WORTH- 10 MARKS-  Mann et al (lying) carried out an observation using video footage of suspects during police interviewing. An alternative way to investigate this would be as a participant observation. ▪ Design an alternative study using a participant observation and describe how it could be conducted.  CUE11- Compare/contrast the use of observation to collect data in the Mann et al (lying) study to two other studies covered in AS-Level AICE  CUE12- Provide two ways in which the Mann et al (lying) study can be considered useful.