A critical look at meta-analytic evidence for the cognitive approach to lie detection: a re-examination of Vrij, Fisher, and Blank (2017)

Purpose. This article provides a re-analysis of Vrij et al.'s (2017, Leg. Crim. Psychol. 22, 1) meta-analysis of the cognitive approach to lie detection. Vrij et al.'s analyses confounded dependent variables, capitalized on aberrant controls, and used unreliable data to inflate support. Me...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Levine, Timothy R. (Autor)
Otros Autores: Blair, J. Pete ; Carpenter, Christopher J.
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2018
En: Legal and criminological psychology
Año: 2018, Volumen: 23, Número: 1, Páginas: 7-19
Acceso en línea: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
confounds
publication bias
Deception
lies
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose. This article provides a re-analysis of Vrij et al.'s (2017, Leg. Crim. Psychol. 22, 1) meta-analysis of the cognitive approach to lie detection. Vrij et al.'s analyses confounded dependent variables, capitalized on aberrant controls, and used unreliable data to inflate support. Methods. Meta-analysis was used to reanalyse Vrij et al.'s data. Studies of human detection and studies involving statistical classification were analysed separately. Results. The advantage offered by the cognitive approach was much smaller than previously claimed. Accuracies in control conditions were unusually low, and the most supportive findings came from the least reliable data. Conclusions. Human detection and statistical classification are different. The evidence for the cognitive approach has been overstated.
Notas:Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 18-19
Gesehen am 25.05.2023
First published: 11 September 2017
Descripción Física:Diagramme
ISSN:2044-8333
DOI:10.1111/lcrp.12115