Search

Your search keyword '"Behavior analysis interview"' showing total 11 results
Start Over Descriptor "Behavior analysis interview"
11 results on '"Behavior analysis interview"'

1. Juveniles and adults differ in their beliefs about cues to deception and strategies during a hypothetical police interview.

Author

Bettens, Talley and Warren, Amye R.

Subjects
*DECEPTION, *YOUNG adults, *BEHAVIORAL assessment, *ADULTS, *POLICE
Abstract

Police officers are often trained to use the Behavior Analysis Interview (BAI) to detect deceit, but it is based on faulty indicators of lying that may be especially problematic for juveniles due to developmental immaturities. Juveniles, young adults, and adults were assigned to guilt or innocence conditions, read a criminal scenario, and self‐reported their likelihood of providing truthful and deceitful responses during a hypothetical BAI. All participants indicated they would give more truthful than deceptive responses. Guilty participants reported more use of strategies to appear innocent, while innocent participants said they would behave naturally. Juveniles were more likely to choose deceitful responses and say they would use strategies to appear innocent during a police interview but endorsed fewer stereotypical cues of deception compared to adults. Juveniles may not recognize how certain behaviors could be seen as cues to deception, which could put them at risk of being misidentified as guilty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. The Analysis of Nonverbal Communication: The Dangers of Pseudoscience in Security and Justice Contexts

Author

Vincent Denault, Pierrich Plusquellec, Louise M. Jupe, Michel St-Yves, Norah E. Dunbar, Maria Hartwig, Siegfried L. Sporer, Jessica Rioux-Turcotte, Jonathan Jarry, Dave Walsh, Henry Otgaar, Andrei Viziteu, Victoria Talwar, David A. Keatley, Iris Blandón-Gitlin, Clint Townson, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Miles L. Patterson, Igor Areh, Alfred Allan, Hilary Evans Cameron, Rémi Boivin, Leanne ten Brinke, Jaume Masip, Ray Bull, Mireille Cyr, Lorraine Hope, Leif A. Strömwall, Stephanie J. Bennett, Faisal Al Menaiya, Richard A. Leo, Annelies Vredeveldt, Marty Laforest, Charles R. Honts, Antonio L. Manzanero, Samantha Mann, Pär-Anders Granhag, Karl Ask, Fiona Gabbert, Jean-Pierre Guay, Alexandre Coutant, Jeffrey Hancock, Valerie Manusov, Judee K. Burgoon, Steven M. Kleinman, Gordon Wright, Sara Landström, Ian Freckelton, Zarah Vernham, and Peter J. van Koppen

Subjects
pseudoscience, nonverbal communication, spot, behavior analysis interview, synergology, Jurisprudence. Philosophy and theory of law, K201-487, Psychology, BF1-990
Abstract

For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices.

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Análisis de la comunicación no verbal: los peligros de la pseudociencia en entornos de seguridad y justicia

Author

Denaut, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise, St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah, Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfred, Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Johathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott, Patterson, Miles, Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary, Boivin, Rémi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif, Bennett, Stephanie, Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard, Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles, Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär-Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee, Kleinman, Steven, Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, van Koppen, Peter, Denaut, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise, St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah, Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfred, Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Johathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott, Patterson, Miles, Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary, Boivin, Rémi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif, Bennett, Stephanie, Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard, Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles, Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär-Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee, Kleinman, Steven, Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter

Abstract

Para los profesionales de la seguridad y la justicia (policías, abogados, jueces), los miles de artículos revisados por pares sobre comunicación no verbal representan fuentes importantes de conocimiento. Sin embargo, a pesar del alcance del trabajo científico realizado sobre este tema, los profesionales pueden recurrir a programas, métodos y enfoques que no reflejan el estado real de la ciencia. El objetivo de este artículo es examinar (i) los conceptos de comunicación no verbal transmitidos por estos programas, métodos y enfoques, pero también (ii) las consecuencias de su uso (por ejemplo, sobre la vida o la libertad de las personas). Para lograr estos objetivos, describimos el alcance de la investigación científica sobre la comunicación no verbal. Se examina un programa (SPOT: Evaluación de pasajeros mediante técnicas de observación), un método (BAI: Entrevista de análisis de conducta) y un enfoque (sinergología) que contradicen el estado de la ciencia. Finalmente, presentamos cinco hipótesis para explicar por qué algunas organizaciones en los campos de la seguridad y la justicia están recurriendo a la pseudociencia y a las técnicas pseudocientíficas. Concluimos el artículo invitando a estas organizaciones a trabajar con la comunidad académica internacional especializada en la investigación sobre comunicación no verbal y detección de mentiras (y verdad) para implementar prácticas basadas en la evidencia., For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; “Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques”), a method (the BAI; “Behavior Analysis Interview”) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices., Fac. de Psicología, TRUE, pub

Published
2023

4. The analysis of nonverbal communication: The dangers of pseudoscience in security and justice contexts

Author

Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise, St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah, Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried, Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott, Patterson, Miles, Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary, Boivin, Rémi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif, Bennett, Stephanie, Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard, Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles, Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee, Kleinman, Steven, Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, van Koppen, Peter, Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise, St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah, Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried, Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott, Patterson, Miles, Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary, Boivin, Rémi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif, Bennett, Stephanie, Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard, Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles, Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee, Kleinman, Steven, Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter

Abstract

For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; “Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques”), a method (the BAI; “Behavior Analysis Interview”) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices., Para los profesionales de la seguridad y la justicia (policías, abogados, jueces), los miles de artículos revisados por pares sobre comunicación no verbal representan fuentes importantes de conocimiento. Sin embargo, a pesar del alcance del trabajo científico realizado sobre este tema, los profesionales pueden recurrir a programas, métodos y enfoques que no reflejan el estado real de la ciencia. El objetivo de este artículo es examinar (i) los conceptos de comunicación no verbal transmitidos por estos programas, métodos y enfoques, pero también (ii) las consecuencias de su uso (por ejemplo, sobre la vida o la libertad de las personas). Para lograr estos objetivos, describimos el alcance de la investigación científica sobre la comunicación no verbal. Se examina un programa (SPOT: Evaluación de pasajeros mediante técnicas de observación), un método (BAI: Entrevista de análisis de conducta) y un enfoque (sinergología) que contradicen el estado de la ciencia. Finalmente, presentamos cinco hipótesis para explicar por qué algunas organizaciones en los campos de la seguridad y la justicia están recurriendo a la pseudociencia y a las técnicas pseudocientíficas. Concluimos el artículo invitando a estas organizaciones a trabajar con la comunidad académica internacional especializada en la investigación sobre comunicación no verbal y detección de mentiras (y verdad) para implementar prácticas basadas en la evidencia., Fac. de Psicología, TRUE, pub

Published
2023

5. The Analysis of Nonverbal Communication: The Dangers of Pseudoscience in Security and Justice Contexts.

Author

Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., and Areh, Igor

Subjects
NONVERBAL communication, PSEUDOSCIENCE, THEORY of knowledge, RESEARCH, LIE detectors & detection, TRUTHFULNESS & falsehood, JUSTICE
Abstract

Copyright of Anuario de Psicología Jurídica is the property of Colegio Oficial de Psicologos de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. L’analyse de la communication non verbale

Subjects
Synergology, SDG 16 - Peace, SPOT, Behavior Analysis Interview, Pseudoscience, Nonverbal Communication, Justice and Strong Institutions
Abstract

For security and justice professionals, the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use. To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; “Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques”), a method (the BAI; “Behavior Analysis Interview”) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques.

Published
2020

7. L’analyse de la communication non verbale:Les dangers de la pseudoscience en contextes de sécurité et de justice

Author

Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary Evans, Boivin, Rémi, Ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif A., Bennett, Stephanie J., Menaiya, Faisal Al, Leo, Richard A., Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles R., Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee K., Kleinman, Steven M., Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter J.

Subjects
Synergology, SPOT, SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, Behavior Analysis Interview, Pseudoscience, Nonverbal Communication
Abstract

For security and justice professionals, the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use. To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; “Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques”), a method (the BAI; “Behavior Analysis Interview”) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques.

Published
2020

8. L’analyse de la communication non verbale: Les dangers de la pseudoscience en contextes de sécurité et de justice

Author

Denault, V., Plusquellec, P., Jupe, L. M., St-Yves, M., Dunbar, N. E., Hartwig, M., Sporer, S. L., Rioux-Turcotte, J., Jarry, J., Walsh, D., Otgaar, H., Viziteu, A., Talwar, V., Keatley, D. A., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Townson, C., Deslauriers-Varin, N., Lilienfeld, S. O., Patterson, M. L., Areh, I., Allan, A., Cameron, H. E., Boivin, R., Ten Brinke, L., Masip, J., Bull, R., Cyr, M., Hope, L., Strömwall, L. A., Bennett, S. J., Menaiya, F. A., Leo, R. A., Vredeveldt, A., Laforest, M., Honts, C. R., Manzanero, A. L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. -A, Ask, K., Fiona Gabbert, Guay, J. -P, Coutant, A., Hancock, J., Manusov, V., Burgoon, J. K., Kleinman, S. M., Wright, G., Landström, S., Freckelton, I., Vernham, Z., Koppen, P. J., RS: FPN CPS IV, Section Forensic Psychology, RS: FdR Institute MICS, Criminal Law and Criminology, Criminology, A-LAB, and Empirical and Normative Studies

Subjects
Synergology, SPOT, SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, Behavior Analysis Interview, Pseudoscience, Nonverbal Communication
Abstract

For security and justice professionals, the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use. To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; “Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques”), a method (the BAI; “Behavior Analysis Interview”) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques.

Published
2020

9. The Analysis of Nonverbal Communication: The Dangers of Pseudoscience in Security and Justice Contexts

Author

Denaut, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise, St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah, Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfred, Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Johathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David, Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott, Patterson, Miles, Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary, Boivin, Rémi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif, Bennett, Stephanie, Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard, Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles, Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär-Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee, Kleinman, Steven, Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter

Subjects
Synergology, psicología social, 6114.09 Psicología Forense, Nonverbal communication, psiquiatría forense, Entrevista de análisis de conducta, Pseudoscience, Criminología, Sinergología, Forensic Psychiatry, Behavior analysis interview, Psychology, Social, Psicología, SPOT, 6114 Psicología social, Pseudociencia, Comunicación no verbal
Abstract

[EN]For security and justice professionals (e.g., police officers, lawyers, judges), the thousands of peer-reviewed articles on nonverbal communication represent important sources of knowledge. However, despite the scope of the scientific work carried out on this subject, professionals can turn to programs, methods, and approaches that fail to reflect the state of science. The objective of this article is to examine (i) concepts of nonverbal communication conveyed by these programs, methods, and approaches, but also (ii) the consequences of their use (e.g., on the life or liberty of individuals). To achieve this objective, we describe the scope of scientific research on nonverbal communication. A program (SPOT; Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques), a method (the BAI; Behavior Analysis Interview) and an approach (synergology) that each run counter to the state of science are examined. Finally, we outline five hypotheses to explain why some organizations in the fields of security and justice are turning to pseudoscience and pseudoscientific techniques. We conclude the article by inviting these organizations to work with the international community of scholars who have scientific expertise in nonverbal communication and lie (and truth) detection to implement evidence-based practices. [ES]Para los profesionales de la seguridad y la justicia (policías, abogados, jueces), los miles de artículos revisados por pares sobre comunicación no verbal representan fuentes importantes de conocimiento. Sin embargo, a pesar del alcance del trabajo científico realizado sobre este tema, los profesionales pueden recurrir a programas, métodos y enfoques que no reflejan el estado real de la ciencia. El objetivo de este artículo es examinar (i) los conceptos de comunicación no verbal transmitidos por estos programas, métodos y enfoques, pero también (ii) las consecuencias de su uso (por ejemplo, sobre la vida o la libertad de las personas). Para lograr estos objetivos, describimos el alcance de la investigación científica sobre la comunicación no verbal. Se examina un programa (SPOT: Evaluación de pasajeros mediante técnicas de observación), un método (BAI: Entrevista de análisis de conducta) y un enfoque (sinergología) que contradicen el estado de la ciencia. Finalmente, presentamos cinco hipótesis para explicar por qué algunas organizaciones en los campos de la seguridad y la justicia están recurriendo a la pseudociencia y a las técnicas pseudocientíficas. Concluimos el artículo invitando a estas organizaciones a trabajar con la comunidad académica internacional especializada en la investigación sobre comunicación no verbal y detección de mentiras (y verdad) para implementar prácticas basadas en la evidencia.

Published
2020

10. The analysis of nonverbal communication: The dangers of pseudoscience in security and justice contexts

Author

Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandon-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary Evans, Boivin, Remi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Stromwall, Leif A., Bennett, Stephanie J., Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard A., Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles R., Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär-Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean-Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee K., Kleinman, Steven M., Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, van Koppen, Peter J., Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandon-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary Evans, Boivin, Remi, ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Stromwall, Leif A., Bennett, Stephanie J., Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard A., Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles R., Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär-Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Guay, Jean-Pierre, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee K., Kleinman, Steven M., Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter J.

Abstract

Vergunst, F., Tremblay, R. E., Nagin, D., Zheng, Y., Galéra, C., Park, J., ... & van Koppen, P. J. (2019). Inattention in boys from low-income backgrounds predicts welfare receipt: a 30-year prospective study. Psychological Medicine, 30, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5093/apj2019a9

11. L’analyse de la communication non verbale: Les dangers de la pseudoscience en contextes de sécurité et de justice

Author

Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary Evans, Boivin, Rémi, Ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif A., Bennett, Stephanie J., Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard A., Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles R., Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Pierre Guay, Jean, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee K., Kleinman, Steven M., Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, van Koppen, Peter J., Denault, Vincent, Plusquellec, Pierrich, Jupe, Louise M., St-Yves, Michel, Dunbar, Norah E., Hartwig, Maria, Sporer, Siegfried L., Rioux-Turcotte, Jessica, Jarry, Jonathan, Walsh, Dave, Otgaar, Henry, Viziteu, Andrei, Talwar, Victoria, Keatley, David A., Blandón-Gitlin, Iris, Townson, Clint, Deslauriers-Varin, Nadine, Lilienfeld, Scott O., Patterson, Miles L., Areh, Igor, Allan, Alfred, Cameron, Hilary Evans, Boivin, Rémi, Ten Brinke, Leanne, Masip, Jaume, Bull, Ray, Cyr, Mireille, Hope, Lorraine, Strömwall, Leif A., Bennett, Stephanie J., Al Menaiya, Faisal, Leo, Richard A., Vredeveldt, Annelies, Laforest, Marty, Honts, Charles R., Manzanero, Antonio L., Mann, Samantha, Granhag, Pär Anders, Ask, Karl, Gabbert, Fiona, Pierre Guay, Jean, Coutant, Alexandre, Hancock, Jeffrey, Manusov, Valerie, Burgoon, Judee K., Kleinman, Steven M., Wright, Gordon, Landström, Sara, Freckelton, Ian, Vernham, Zarah, and van Koppen, Peter J.

Abstract

Denault, V., Plusquellec, P., Jupe, L. M., St-Yves, M., Dunbar, N. E., Hartwig, M., ... van Koppen, P. J. (2020). L’analyse de la communication non verbale: Les dangers de la pseudoscience en contextes de sécurité et de justice. Revue Internationale de Criminologie et de Police Technique et Scientifique, 73(1), 15-44. Please note: This item is in the French language

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results