Detecting deception

Current models and directions

Richard I. Lanyon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Traditional procedures for detecting deception are based on the global-signs-of-lying model, with its assumption that certain universal, physiologically mediated signs result from attempts to deceive, independent of content. More recent attempts to detect deception can profitably be viewed from a cognitive rather than affective perspective: (a) in terms of accuracy of knowledge, in which a person's success at deception regarding a particular characteristic depends on the extent of his or her knowledge of that characteristic; and (b) in terms of attempts to personally influence the examiner. Such procedures have been successful in detecting simulation in psychopathology, amnesia, neurological disorders, pain, and other areas. They tend to be situation specific and to depend on empirically discovered differences between simulators and persons who possess the characteristic.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)377-387
Number of pages11
JournalClinical Psychology: Science and Practice
Volume4
Issue number4
StatePublished - Dec 1997

Fingerprint

Deception
Amnesia
Nervous System Diseases
Psychopathology
Pain
Direction compound

Keywords

  • Deception
  • Defensiveness
  • Faking
  • Malingering
  • Simulation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Clinical Psychology

Cite this

Detecting deception : Current models and directions. / Lanyon, Richard I.

In: Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, Vol. 4, No. 4, 12.1997, p. 377-387.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lanyon, Richard I. / Detecting deception : Current models and directions. In: Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. 1997 ; Vol. 4, No. 4. pp. 377-387.
@article{53f80b37157f4138b6bb458cd70981e4,
title = "Detecting deception: Current models and directions",
abstract = "Traditional procedures for detecting deception are based on the global-signs-of-lying model, with its assumption that certain universal, physiologically mediated signs result from attempts to deceive, independent of content. More recent attempts to detect deception can profitably be viewed from a cognitive rather than affective perspective: (a) in terms of accuracy of knowledge, in which a person's success at deception regarding a particular characteristic depends on the extent of his or her knowledge of that characteristic; and (b) in terms of attempts to personally influence the examiner. Such procedures have been successful in detecting simulation in psychopathology, amnesia, neurological disorders, pain, and other areas. They tend to be situation specific and to depend on empirically discovered differences between simulators and persons who possess the characteristic.",
keywords = "Deception, Defensiveness, Faking, Malingering, Simulation",
author = "Lanyon, {Richard I.}",
year = "1997",
month = "12",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "377--387",
journal = "Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice",
issn = "0969-5893",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Detecting deception

T2 - Current models and directions

AU - Lanyon, Richard I.

PY - 1997/12

Y1 - 1997/12

N2 - Traditional procedures for detecting deception are based on the global-signs-of-lying model, with its assumption that certain universal, physiologically mediated signs result from attempts to deceive, independent of content. More recent attempts to detect deception can profitably be viewed from a cognitive rather than affective perspective: (a) in terms of accuracy of knowledge, in which a person's success at deception regarding a particular characteristic depends on the extent of his or her knowledge of that characteristic; and (b) in terms of attempts to personally influence the examiner. Such procedures have been successful in detecting simulation in psychopathology, amnesia, neurological disorders, pain, and other areas. They tend to be situation specific and to depend on empirically discovered differences between simulators and persons who possess the characteristic.

AB - Traditional procedures for detecting deception are based on the global-signs-of-lying model, with its assumption that certain universal, physiologically mediated signs result from attempts to deceive, independent of content. More recent attempts to detect deception can profitably be viewed from a cognitive rather than affective perspective: (a) in terms of accuracy of knowledge, in which a person's success at deception regarding a particular characteristic depends on the extent of his or her knowledge of that characteristic; and (b) in terms of attempts to personally influence the examiner. Such procedures have been successful in detecting simulation in psychopathology, amnesia, neurological disorders, pain, and other areas. They tend to be situation specific and to depend on empirically discovered differences between simulators and persons who possess the characteristic.

KW - Deception

KW - Defensiveness

KW - Faking

KW - Malingering

KW - Simulation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0001446560&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0001446560&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 377

EP - 387

JO - Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

JF - Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

SN - 0969-5893

IS - 4

ER -