Article (Scientific journals)
Validity of Content-Based Techniques to Distinguish True and Fabricated Statements: A Meta-Analysis
Oberlader, Verena A.; Naefgen, Christoph; Koppehele-Goseel, Judith et al.
2016In Law and Human Behavior, 40 (4), p. 440-457
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
 

Files


Full Text
Oberladeretal.inpress.CBCA Meta-Analysis.pdf
Publisher postprint (570.09 kB)
Download

All documents in ORBilu are protected by a user license.

Send to



Details



Abstract :
[en] Within the scope of judicial decisions, approaches to distinguish between true and fabricated statements have been of particular importance since ancient times. Although methods focusing on “prototypical” deceptive behavior (e.g., psychophysiological phenomena, nonverbal cues) have largely been rejected with regard to validity, content-based techniques constitute a promising approach and are well established within the applied forensic context. The basic idea of this approach is that experience-based and non-experience-based statements differ in their content-related quality. In order to test the validity of the most prominent content-based techniques, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) and Reality Monitoring (RM), we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis on English- and German-language studies. Based on a variety of decision criteria, 56 studies were included revealing an overall effect size of g = 1.03 (95% CI [0.78, 1.27], Q = 420.06, p < .001, I² = 92.48%, N = 3429). There was no significant difference in the effectiveness of CBCA and RM. Additionally, we investigated a number of moderator variables such as characteristics of participants, statements, and judgment procedures, as well as general study characteristics. Results showed that the application of all CBCA criteria outperformed any incomplete CBCA criteria set. Furthermore, statement classification based on discriminant functions revealed higher discrimination rates than decisions based on sum scores. Finally, unpublished studies showed higher effect sizes than studies published in peer-reviewed journals. All results are discussed in terms of their significance for future research (e.g., developing standardized decision rules) and practical application (e.g., user training, applying complete criteria set).
Disciplines :
Theoretical & cognitive psychology
Author, co-author :
Oberlader, Verena A.
Naefgen, Christoph
Koppehele-Goseel, Judith
Quinten, Laura
Banse, Rainer
Schmidt, Alexander F. ;  University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Language and Literature, Humanities, Arts and Education (FLSHASE) > Integrative Research Unit: Social and Individual Development (INSIDE)
External co-authors :
yes
Language :
English
Title :
Validity of Content-Based Techniques to Distinguish True and Fabricated Statements: A Meta-Analysis
Publication date :
July 2016
Journal title :
Law and Human Behavior
ISSN :
1573-661X
Publisher :
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, United States - New York
Volume :
40
Issue :
4
Pages :
440-457
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Available on ORBilu :
since 15 March 2016

Statistics


Number of views
242 (3 by Unilu)
Number of downloads
1992 (0 by Unilu)

Scopus citations®
 
83
Scopus citations®
without self-citations
81
OpenCitations
 
61
WoS citations
 
78

Bibliography


Similar publications



Contact ORBilu