Search

Despite the importance of credibility assessments in forensic settings, research shows that forensic professionals are mediocre at this task. This study tested the efficacy of a 2.5-hour training workshop on Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID), a system of investigative interviewing and credibility assessment using verbal content analysis, in a sample of 99 forensic professionals at a maximum-security forensic hospital in the United States. Accuracy in detecting deception was assessed before and after training via written transcripts. Results showed that training improved participants' accuracy, with accuracy rates increasing from 61% to 70%. Implications of the findings and recommendations for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Laboratory-based detecting deception research suggests that truthful statements differ from those of deceptive statements. This nonlaboratory study tested whether forensic statement analysis (FSA) methods would distinguish genuine from false eyewitness accounts about exposure to a highly stressful event. A total of 35 military participants were assigned to truthful or deceptive eyewitness conditions. Genuine eyewitness reported truthfully about exposure to interrogation stress. Deceptive eyewitnesses studied transcripts of genuine eyewitnesses for 24 h and falsely claimed they had been interrogated. Cognitive Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and assessed by FSA raters blind to the status of participants. Genuine accounts contained more unique words, external and contextual referents, and a greater total word count than did deceptive statements. The type-token ratio was lower in genuine statements. The classification accuracy using FSA techniques was 82%. FSA methods may be effective in real-world circumstances and have relevance to professionals in law enforcement, security, and criminal justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Valid screens for feigned cognitive impairment are a fundamental component of any forensic assessment. The TOMI is a verbally administered, two-alternative forced-choice screen for feigned cognitive impairment in competence to stand trial (CST) evaluations. The present study provided further validation for the use of this tool in a sample of 82 forensic inpatients, the second investigation of the TOMI in a real-world, psycholegal context. Using three independent external criteria-the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 2 score, TOMM Retention Trial score, and a clinical treatment team decision-and these combined criteria-the Legal Knowledge scale (TOMI-L) evidenced high levels of sensitivity and specificity and excellent negative predictive power (NPP). The General Knowledge scale (TOMI-G) demonstrated poor sensitivity but high specificity and NPP. The authors discuss the utility of both scales in guiding and streamlining more thorough assessments of response styles in CST evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. Previous research has suggested that true and invented memories can be distinguished between using the reality monitoring criteria. Two different coding schemes were used to examine the correct classification of reports as truthful or deceptive on the basis of individual reality-monitoring (RM) criteria. Method. Drawing upon the RM framework the present experiment examined transcripts of verbal accounts of eyewitnesses to a staged event or made up details about the incident. The statements were elicited during a face-to-face cognitive interview (CI) and were analysed by coders trained in the identification of criteria indicative of self-experienced and invented accounts (referred to here as Version I) and a similar coding method (referred to here as Version 2). Results. A distinction was made between 'external memories' (affective, perceptual, and contextual details) and 'internal' memories (cognitive operations). For Version I, the results indicated a higher number of contextual and external details in the descriptions of experienced events and as is commonly found in the deception literature, truthful accounts were longer. For Version 2, temporal and auditory details were more frequent in true accounts. Contrary to prediction, there were also more references to cognitive operations in true accounts. Conclusions, Any forensic application of RM should consider how external factors (characteristics of the event, motivation to deceive, and questioning style) influence the presence of RM criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]