Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Abstract
Historically based on pseudoscience, deception detection has become a legitimate scientific
field of study with recent research efforts seeking to disentangle such a complicated human
behavior being carefully designed, conducted and analyzed. Not only does the ability to identify
deceit have monetary concerns, in areas such as law enforcement, decisions may result in life
and death outcomes. The existing sources of deception instruction have and continue to adhere to
inappropriate content while also lacking the necessary pedagogical structure. While these sources
are resistant to change, the problems are all resolvable with the adoption of this area of study into
accredited institutions of higher education as part of the undergraduate curriculum. One pilot
course already successfully demonstrates the academic fit as well as a very positive student
response.
Introduction
Although an elusive goal, the ability to consistently and correctly identify deception has
been sought throughout history and the methods thought successful have been passed down
through literature and cultural tradition.
Unfortunately the methods passed down are based in myth, anecdote and unverified as well
as flawed logic. None are particularly successful. Even in the 20th century when a façade of
science was applied, the same underlying pseudoscientific rationale and associated methods are
still applied. Regardless, the quest and need for a valid and reliable approach to determining lies
and honesty is needed as much now as ever, if not more.
This is obvious when looking at the budgetary funding from governmental agencies and the
allocated training budgets of businesses. For instance Homeland Security’s 2013 budget provides
millions of dollars for programs that include research into deception oriented behavioral
assessment (DHS 2013 Budget). Many federal, state and local agencies as well as businesses also
appropriate significant funding for deception training programs.
With governments, the need for such knowledge is clear, National Security among other
applications. But why are businesses interested? The retail industry loses over $100 billion a year
to various forms of deceit. For example businesses report losing $25,000 each time they are
deceived into hiring and then having to replace the wrong person. Even though 25% report hiring
losses exceeding $50,000 per faulty decision, it pales in comparison to the yearly losses of $1
trillion by U.S. corporations as a whole (Harris Survey, 12/2012).
While these financial losses are quite concerning, the stakes are much higher when
unidentified deception leads to injury or death. This is the likely explanation for why criminal
justice professionals being the main consumers of the existing deception related workshops.
This is especially important in that most of the existing programs were not only tailored to
law enforcement officers (LEOs) they have often been taught by them. As a result the
characteristics of the LEO profession (i.e. specific needs, subcultural details, education and
training programs, etc.) will be used to illustrate deception related information.
Although people tend to think of lie detection as the reliance on technology to identify
deception or the ability to recognize some specific indicator that identifies when a person is
being untruthful, deception experts generally consider the best approach for identifying deceit is
to look for discrepancies between a person’s purposeful communications, their behaviors and
how they manage (or fail to manage) their other forms of communication. This approach is not
only useful in identifying deceptive information but also recognizing indications of other
undisclosed or hidden information which may be is some way noteworthy.
While the pure science of lie detection remains somewhat nebulous, many of the recent
approaches extract conclusions of deceit based on how people interact and communicate. The
process is referred to here as ‘Deceptive Behavior Analysis and Management’ or DBAM.
Because the methods employed within DBAM consider all forms of communication based
behaviors, the focus of DBAM is applicable regardless of socio-environmental context (criminal,
personal, business, human resource, social work, etc.).
The Problems
Flawed Content
Although the purpose of a seminar is to provide quality information, providing information
that lacks objective research support as is common in deception related training programs, results
in the spreading of misinformation and the misapplication of associated techniques (Borum,
2006; Vrij, et al. 2006).
This is especially concerning since most deception identification programs derive much of
their content from invalid and unverified sources (i.e. pseudo-science, poor research, folk tales,
innuendo, myth, anecdotes and personal biases).
Probably the most common issue is the overgeneralized presumption of a link between
behavior, demeanor and deception (Akehurst et 1996; Stromwall and Granhag, 2003; Vrij and
Semin, 1996). Sadly the bulk of deception indicators taught by these programs is based on these
exaggerated presumptions.
Although stress does often occur with deceit, it is both invalid and unreliable as an
indicator since there are many other causes of stress. Thus if stress is indicated, the evaluator
must make an interpretative judgment call as to whether deception is the cause.
While the ‘stress equals deception’ paradigm has some relevance, stress approaches, even
with advanced instrumentation and experienced operators, have an unacceptable rate of error.
Although the average person has a 47% error rate (Bond and DePaulo, 2004), even the better
error rate of 30.5% from existing deception identification approaches is unacceptable when
making important decisions (Ben-Shakhar and Furedy, 1990).
Whether the methods have a working theoretical foundation or not they must still withstand
the scrutiny of objective verification before receiving a stamp of validity. Otherwise the validity
and reliability problems potentially exist due to the inclusion of invalid anecdotes, content
contamination, unidentified intervening variables and any number of potential biases.
Concerns of Subculturally Accepted Continuing Education:
Although many organizations provide deception identification training, the largest and
most influencing is offered by John Reid and Associates as an integral component of its highly
manipulative interrogation training known as the Reid Technique. This component is known as
the Reid ‘Behavioral Analysis Interview’ or BAI and teaches behavioral indicators the company
claims are indicators of deceit. If the interviewer concludes a subject is deceptive, that
conclusion is the sign for the interviewer to convert to their interrogation format.
The premise of the BAI is the existence of a valid link between indicators of stress,
demeanor and deception. This however, lacks a sound theoretical or objective research basis and
if coupled with a response bias can and has produced conclusions of a false positive (deception
thought to exist where it does not) which in turn led to the interrogation process (Akehurst et.al.,
1996; Ekman and O'Sullivan, 1991; Frank and Feeley, 2003; Köhnken, 1987; Mann and Bull,
2004; Stromwall and Granhag, 2003; Vrij and Graham, 1997; Vrij and Mann: 2001a; Vrij and
Mann 2001b; Vrij and Semin, 1996; Vrij, et.al., 2006).
Further investigations (Granhag and Stromwell, 2004; Kassin, et.al. 2010) found the BAI
When combined with an officer’s overconfidence in their abilities may place an innocent person
in a position where a false confession (such as part of a plea bargain) will be perceived by an
innocent suspect as their best option .
This is a particular problem because the Reid company has received broad acceptance by
the LEO subculture even though the deception information taught by the BAI has been found
outdated, insufficient and lacking validity (Bradford and Pynes, 1999; Wall and Culloo, 1973;
National Defense Intelligence College, 2006).
Unfortunately BAI training has become embedded within the LEO subculture and its widely
shared misinformation is continually propagated throughout the LEO subculture. Efforts to alter
this view have met with significant resistance and any contrary evidence is similarly rejected.
Not surprisingly, several European countries have limited the use of the Reid interrogation
technique (Vrij, 1998).
Incorrect Educational Format
Seminars promote the belief that those attending short (1 to 5 day) seminar programs can
absorb and retain the presented information. While with some topics this may be a valid
assumption, it is an incorrect conclusion with respect to DBAM content material.
Modern research has determined effective deception skill requires the application of
complex and intricate information. This is likely why the centuries of effort have failed to
produce a successful method.
Many educational specialists have found the amount of time allocated to detailed and
involved information greatly influences content retention. Clark and Linn (2003) found a 12
week curriculum focused on a single complex topic achieved an average of 80% comprehension
while the overall comprehension from a 6 week program was only 40%. When the content
required connecting with other core concepts, comprehension dropped to a mere 27% (George,
et. al. 2003). As the instructional time dedicated to such involved areas of study is reduced there
is a strong and significant reduction in comprehension and retention. In short, existing deception
detection training programs fail to follow principles of effective training” (Docan-Morgan,
2007b). When responding to a online survey, 100% of responding deception experts agreed
significant improvements in effectiveness require much more time and practice than what is
available in these short seminar programs (Camp, 2011).
To gain significant knowledge via seminars, it would be necessary to cobble together a
cohesive whole of information by attending many different seminars, each multiple times. With
fees averaging $500 per seminar, and seeking an 80% retention rate, the learner would have to
attend at least nine seminar sessions (a total of 28 working days) and invest some $4500 in
attendance costs (not counting lost work time) all to gain proficiency in a single approach. Even
then their disjointed character does not support or encourage effective merging of the offered
information (even if it were completely valid).
426 (79%)
Street Officers
A similar situation exists for officers assaulted in the line of duty; Well over 90% were
newer street-level police officers with most assaults occurring when responding to "disturbance
calls” (family quarrels and such). And such statistics indicate these less experienced officers
being on the street have the greatest need for such training. Yet Frank and Feeley (2003:59)
found fewer than 10% [of street officers] had received any additional training on detecting lies
and interpersonal skills.
If valid interpersonal knowledge (as in DBAM) were appropriately taught those most facing
the greatest risks could improve their occupational effectiveness and safety.
Training Hours
500
400
300
200
100
0
* Includes Interviewing and Interrogation and all other interpersonal skills training
Bureau of Justice Statistics 2005; Wall &Culloo, 1973:431.
Subcultural Resocialization
Socialization and resocialization shape the beliefs, practices and attitudes of those becoming
members of a group.
The influence of the Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) subculture provides the expectations,
behaviors, attitudes, values, and norms for those in law enforcement. This includes information
informally transmitted concerning deception and related interpersonal behaviors.
The moment a recruit enters the academy, subcultural training and resocialization begins
(Ainsworth, 1995). The purpose is to help recruits manage the stresses and difficult situation they
will face within their profession. Subcultural resocialization occurs by transmitting accepted
practices, beliefs and guiding rules through formal and informal means (Manning, 1995:472;
Van Maanen, 1974:85-86).
The formal socialization provided by the police academy training curriculum teaches “what
to do”, while informal socialization is typically provided in the field with more senior personnel
and is focused on, “Here is how things really work” (Fielding, 1988; Kappeler et al., 1998).
Although much of the resocialization process is positive and useful, some aspects can be
counter-productive, actually reducing deception skills. The reasons can be found within specific
characteristics and influences of the LEO subculture (Hickman and Reaves, 2006).
From the very beginning of academy training the recruit is exposed to a constant emphasis
on potential dangers with the chief source of that danger being identified as the general public
(Van Maanen, 1974; Kappeler, et. al., 1998). This creates a cynical distrust (Paoline, 2003) and
leads to the conclusion that “other officers are their only protection against a treacherous and
ostracizing world” (Barker, 1999:308). In other words, a ‘we versus they’ attitude toward
citizenry results (Kappeler et al., 1998; Skolnick, 1994; Sparrow et al., 1990; Westley, 1970;
Manning, 1995).
While this attitude helps to keep officers safe, it also includes the view that the public (any
non-LEO) is naïve and incorrect concerning law enforcement related information. As a result,
law enforcement officers come to distrust information not provided by other subcultural
members (Paoline, 2003). This creates the potential for two serious problems:
1. Regardless of external objective evidence, LEO approved deception training programs
are accepted as valid and will be formally and informally transmitted to other LEO’s;
2. When valid information is made available to LEO’s from a non-approved source, the
information is often rejected and the potential benefits never realized.
Another issue of concern is that recruits are taught to always ‘have the edge’ when dealing
with the public (Paoline, 2003). Maintaining this control (the situational upper-hand) is greatly
dependent on the officer’s interpersonal skills and abilities (Muir, 1977; Van Maanen, 1974). If
their assessment of a situation or person is incorrect (which may be the case when based on
flawed knowledge) the officer may respond inappropriately causing any number of problems for
both officer and citizen.
In other words, during subcultural resocialization process the academy training (flaws and
all) is further reinforced and more deeply internalized creating a resistant belief system that
includes any transmitted misinformation.
Objective 4: Identify the most functional and compatible approaches and how they are best used.
Solution: With the increased concerns stemming from 9/11, more funding became available for
carefully designed and conducted academic DBAM research. From the research findings a
variety of new validated approaches have emerged and higher levels of effectiveness are
accessible. Although studies show we can learn to identify deception at levels above chance,
how much one can improve has not been fully determined (Frank and Feeley, 2003).
Many of the top researchers agree that a multimodal/multichannel triangulation approach
consisting of verified information that, if properly designed and imparted, could achieve
accuracy levels of 90% or more (DePaulo and Pfeifer, 1986).
Solution: With deception related studies now generating sufficient and appropriate research
based information, DBAM can be taught as a full collegiate course within institutions of higher
education. Because the goal of higher education is to provide the best quality education possible,
the previous lack of research-based information greatly inhibited the acceptance of deception
related studies as a serious area of study rather than as a pseudo-scientific novelty.
To make the research knowledge available the findings must be identified from among the
many fields of study that have been performing relevant serious DBAM related research. These
findings must be isolated from the bulk of writings which are mostly pseudo-scientific.
Next the isolated information must be organized and pedagogically optimized. This is a
normal procedure for transforming an area of interest into an academically appropriate course.
Finally the course must be field tested to determine its fit and appropriateness as an
undergraduate course.
Solution: As previously identified, the existing sources of deception training, cultural myth and
unverified anecdotal experiences taught as fact are all sources of misinformation. By
incorporating the validated research findings into instructional components the misinformation is
being replaced with tested findings. Socially internalized information is never removed but rather
it is blended with existing internalized information (Wrong, 1962). Presenting validated
information prior to subcultural indoctrination provides resistance to the misinformation that will
be offered in the resocialization process.
Higher Education
While not required for most entry level law enforcement, a college education is nonetheless
becoming the standard for those seeking a law enforcement career. This relatively new LEO
demographic variable provides a unique opportunity to improve existing and future criminal
justice professionals.
The LEO educational movement began almost 100 years ago with the initial thrust
beginning in the 1930’s. At that time officials began to realize the importance of education and
with more than 90% of their officers not having attended high school. In response they began
officially recommending that LEO’s need to receive more formal education.
Progress was glacially slow. By 1960 while many LEO’s had attended some high school,
few had any college at all. That began to change in 1968 with the creation of the National
Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, the forerunner to the National Institute of
Justice (NIJ) and with the “The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the
Administration of Justice” report (1967). The report’s emphasis on education was strongly
supported by the Office of Law Enforcement Assistance and the result was that criminal justice
began having a significant place within higher education as its own field of study and the ideal of
criminal justice professionals having advanced education began to receive significant
governmental support.
Still, by 1990 while some progress had been made, only 1 in 10 LEO had any college
education whatsoever (a yearly growth rate from 1930 of 0.17%). However, by 2003 over 30%
of employed LEO’s were college educated indicating major advancement in the effort (Hickman
and Reaves, 2006).
As the numbers continued escalating the field began to realize there were stumbling blocks
with Criminal Justice as a college major. Because of the experienced growth colleges were
realizing the criminal justice major was having an impact on higher education and one of the
most concerning was the need to clarify the educational expectations, goals and objectives.
Many academicians felt the pragmatic focus of criminal justice was inappropriate for higher
education. Although most criminal justice programs make it clear they are not teaching the
vocation of policing, the majority of the public (59%) indicated they believe higher education
should combine practical training with intellectual development (Pew Research, 2011). Today
most criminal justice programs in colleges have adopted exactly that approach.
However, the existence of criminal justice in higher education has had some significant and
encouraging impact. Studies show that college-educated officers are verbally more effective, less
authoritarian in their beliefs, more open minded to new ideas (including those from non-LEO
sources), place a higher value on ethical behaviors and are less likely to resort to violence when
carrying out their duties. In addition they take fewer sick days, receive fewer injuries, have fewer
complaints registered against them and are rated higher by their superiors (Carter, Sapp, &
Stephens, 1989; Reaves, 1996; Walker, 1999; Britz, 1997; Haarr, 1997; Manning, 1994b;
Paoline et al., 2000, 2003; Walker, 1985; Chan, 1996; Fielding, 1994). In short, college
educated LEO’s are better able and better suited in carrying out the changing duties needed in
our growing, complex and ever more sophisticated society.
Further, the presence of the major has stimulated other more academic areas that are without
question extremely valuable. Among these are forensic science, forensic psychology, corrections
and penology, cross cultural and applied criminology.
During the development of the criminal justice college program, many colleges began
offering specialized areas of concentrations and course options to compete for students. While
many of these reflected the popular media presentations of criminal justice (i.e. CSI, Profiler,
Criminal Minds, etc.) others invested in and implemented ‘in-house’ police academies (complete
with firing ranges and high speed driver training courses). However, many of the academies
failed due to devastating cost and liability issues and the ‘interest’ based specialized courses
were offered as electives because they lacked appropriate academic merit, were unable to
provide significant professional and/or personal advantages and some implied the potential of
unrealistic career opportunities.
Presently (2013) criminal justice programs from college to college have more or less
standardized their curriculum although many still offer specialized but narrowly focused courses
(i.e. arson investigation, crime scene photography, fingerprint identification, etc.).
DM Pilot Results
Although the course was listed as a criminal justice elective, all majors were allowed to take
the course for general credit as a general education elective.
After the initial offering student authored course evaluations noted it as a challenging
course, yet was extremely well liked. Similarly enrollment numbers were often double the size of
the typical class for that college. As the course earned student approval, primarily by word of
mouth to other students, enrollment began to shift from primarily criminal justice majors to
include students from virtually every major within the college although most popular with
students from Criminal Justice, psychology and business.
Student evaluations of the course (as required by the college) rated the course generally as
excellent. In addition, at both colleges the instructor received multiple requests for advanced and
independent study courses as well as offers to assist in related research.
Did DM achieve the identified needs (see ‘Resolving the Problem’)? While post-graduation
reports for the college as a whole did not address specific courses, many graduates chose to
maintain contact with the course instructor. In each case, students that took the course affirmed
the successful use of the course information. Comments from students that became LEO’s after
graduation indicated the ability to retain the factual course information over and above the
misinformation received during their academy training. One response from a graduate who is
now a St. Louis police officer wrote, "I use what you taught in multiple situations on a weekly
basis… narcotic investigations, assaults, domestic violence, and more. It has definitely given me
the upper hand especially when dealing with career criminals who know the game.” However,
one negative comment was posted about the course on a social media website:
Isn’t it bull that some professors teach classes like Deception Management? My
bf [boyfriend] took that class and I made a mistake & cheated on him. I was
hoping to never tell him. He asked me to write down what I did that day for his
[Deception Management] class. Then he started finding all these errors and stuff
and I finally confessed. He ruined my relationship. You should not teach those
things! (Anonymous, Yahoo Answers, 2008).
While a comprehensive objective evaluation has yet to be conducted, the existing evidence
indicates the course does achieve the desired goals.
Unintended Benefits
As with many implemented programs, several unintended results were revealed; with
respect to the DM course they were considered as unintended benefits such as: the college
received notoriety due to the unique quality and character of the program due to the unique
character of the course; evaluations by students included improved interpersonal skills (both
personally and professionally); their employers indicated an interest in their knowledge from the
course and were considering having the graduate use their knowledge by conducting in-house
training for co-workers.