In May 2017, Charlotte Hudson, Irena Boskovic, and Aleksandras Izotovas will present their research in the European Association of Psychology & Law (EAPL) conference in Mechelen, Belgium.
Below you will find the abstracts for each of their talks.
Title: Individual Differences in Information Accumulation and Interviewing Aptitude
Abstract: Individual differences in interviewer performance have largely been ignored by research in forensic interviewing, in favour of analyses of questioning protocol and average performance of the interviewee. Research has shown that interviewer-interviewee rapport influences interviewees’ attempts to recall crime relevant details, and that positive or negative interactions with the interviewer will influence interviewees’ attempts to recall additional detail. However, the ability to develop rapport varies between individuals. This study explores the individual differences in the interviewer’s ability to conduct an effective information-gathering interview. The study design used a half-block round robin methodology, where every interviewee was interviewed once by each interviewer in turn. It consisted of 10 rounds with five interviewees (N = 50) who were interviewed by a retained set of four interviewers and asked to complete a written report as a fifth interview. Interviewees were asked to watch a real life crime video and then interviewed. In each round this occurred five times, with a different video and interviewer each time, resulting in 250 interviews. Following each interview both interviewer and interviewee were asked to complete dyadic ratings. Interviewers used a set interview script derived from the Cognitive Interview, and interviewer and interviewee characteristics were quantified using the HEXACO-60 (Ashton & Lee, 2009). Correct, incorrect and confabulated detail were coded to examine the quality and quantity of information in the statements. Correct details were further coded as fine grain or coarse grain detail. Individual differences in interviewers’ ability to effectively gather information will be discussed and compared to the dyadic perceptions of interview performance. The presentation concludes with suggestions for further investigations in this area and a discussion about how individual differences can influence the suitability of interviewers.
Title: Stroop Performance and Symptom Endorsement in Feigning Test Anxiety
Abstract: Some researchers have argued that the Modified Stroop Task (MST) can be employed to detect feigning of anxiety symptoms. The basic idea is that Modified Stroop interference effects are beyond conscious control and that when participants exhibit these effects, they reflect genuine psychopathology. We examined this assumption using a test-retest design. In the first session, students (N = 26) responded honestly, while in the second session they were asked to read a vignette about test anxiety and then fake this condition. During both sessions, we administered a Modified Stroop task consisting of neutral, anxiety-related, and test anxiety-related words. Participants also completed the Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI; Merten et al., 2016) that focuses on overreporting of pseudo-symptoms. Our feigning instructions were successful in that students succeeded in generating the typical MST effect by providing longer response latencies on anxiety related and test anxiety – related words, compared with neutral words. Furthermore, on the SRSI students overendorsed both genuine and pseudo-symptoms significantly more often in second, feigning session than in the control condition. We conclude that the MST effect is not immune to feigning tendencies, while the SRSI provides promising results that require future research.
Title: Memory-based Lie Detection: The Effects of Different Memory Enhancing Techniques on Delayed Recall
Abstract: Research to date has revealed significant differences between truth-tellers and liars in terms of quantity and quality of details provided in statements after a delay; especially when specific interviewing strategies have been used (e.g. strategic use of evidence or unanticipated questions or tasks; Lancaster, Vrij, Hope, & Walker, 2013; McDougall & Bull, 2015). Previous findings suggest that memory-enhancing techniques can aid in detecting deception (e.g. Hernández-Fernaud & Alonso-Quecuty, 1997; Vrij et al., 2010), however, it is not clear yet how they influence statements after a delay. In the current study we explored how memory-enhancing techniques (context reinstatement, sketch, and timeline) during an immediate interview after a target event affect the statements of truth-tellers and liars after a longer retention interval (two-week period). Interviews were analysed using the Reality Monitoring approach (Johnson & Raye, 1981) and primarily focused on the amount of visual, spatial and temporal details in the statements.The sample comprised of 142 participants who volunteered to take part in the experiment for course credits or a small honorarium. This study used a 2 (Veracity: truth vs lie) X 3 (Mnemonic: context reinstatement vs sketch vs timeline) X 2 (Interview: immediate vs delayed) design with Veracity and Mnemonic as between-subjects factors and Interview as within-subjects factor (Figure 1). Participants watched a video (lasting 5min.) with a staged break in to the apartment. After watching the video, they were interviewed the same day and after two-week delay. Results will be presented and discussed during the presentation at the EAPL conference.
Copyright 2014 Hope