Bogaard G, van de Bovekamp AM, Colwell K. Assessing the efficacy of baselining in deception detection: A comparative analysis of the reality interview and structured interview.
Acta Psychol (Amst) 2024;
242:104112. [PMID:
38070326 DOI:
10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104112]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2023] [Revised: 11/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Detecting deception is challenging; there exists no universal cue that gives away deceit and people vary greatly in how they communicate. One way to potentially improve deception detection is by comparing multiple responses of the same individual to identify verbal deviations - a method known as baselining. This study examined the impact of baselining embedded in a specific interview protocol to improve lie detection. Participants (N = 179) viewed mock crimes and were instructed to lie or tell the truth about what they witnessed. Next, they were interviewed including a truthful baseline (Reality Interview Modified: RIM), or no baseline (Reality Interview: RI; Structured Interview: SI). Results showed that truth tellers in the SI and RI conditions provided more details than liars during free recall, while no detail differences emerged for the RIM condition. Follow-up questions in all conditions showed truth tellers offered more details than liars. Surprisingly, we found no evidence that verbal deviations from a baseline can be used as effective indicators of deception. In sum, further research is needed to explore the best application of baselining for lie detection purposes.
Collapse