The detection of deception during trials: Ignoring the nonverbal communication of witnesses is not the solution—A response to Vrij and Turgeon (2018)
Abstract
In their paper ‘Evaluating credibility of witnesses—Are we instructing jurors on invalid factors?’, Vrij and Turgeon (2018) argue that jurors should be advised not to consider demeanour when trying to evaluate if witnesses are honest or dishonest because of ‘overwhelming scientific evidence’. However, in this response, we contend that substantial empirical scientific studies on nonverbal communication alongside the limitations of deception detection research, as cited by Vrij and Turgeon (2018), undermine their overall argument. While jurors should be warned about erroneous beliefs and dubious concepts on human communication, jurors should also be advised to consider demeanour as a way of enriching their overall understanding of witnesses and their verbal testimony.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Adams RB, Kleck RE (2003) Perceived gaze direction and the processing of facial displays of emotion. Psychological Science 14(6): 644–647.
Adams RB, Kleck RE (2005) Effects of direct and averted gaze on the perception of facially communicated emotion. Emotion 5(1): 3–11.
Akhtar S, Justice LV, Knott L, Kibowski F, Conway MA (2018) The ‘common sense’ memory beliefs and its implication. The International Journal of Evidence and Proof 22(3): 289–304.
Beaudry JL, Lindsay RCL, Leach A-M., Mansour JK, Bertrand MI, Kalmet N (2015) The effect of evidence type, identification accuracy, line-up presentation, and line-up administration on observers’ perceptions of eyewitnesses. Legal and Criminological Psychology 20(2): 343–364.
Blanch-Hartigan D, Ruben MA (2013) Training clinicians to accurately perceive their patients: Current state and future directions. Patient Education and Counseling 92(3): 328–336.
Blanch-Hartigan D, Andrzejewski S, Hill K (2012) The effectiveness of training to improve person perception accuracy: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 34(6): 483–498.
Blanch-Hartigan D, Andrzejewski SA, Hill KM (2016) Training people to be interpersonally accurate. In: Hall JA, Schmid Mast M, West TV (eds) The Social Psychology of Perceiving Others Accurately. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 253–269.
Bogaard G, Meijer EH, Vrij A, Merckelbach H (2016) Strong, but wrong: Lay people’s and police officers’ beliefs about verbal and nonverbal cues to deception. Plos One 11(6). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156615.
Bond CF, DePaulo BM (2006) Accuracy of deception judgements. Personality and Social Psychology Review 10(3): 214–234.
Bond CF, DePaul BM (2008) Individual differences in judging deception: Accuracy and bias. Psychological Bulletin 134(4): 477–492.
Burgoon JK, Guerrero LK, Floyd K (2010) Nonverbal Communication. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Denault V (2015) Communication non verbale et crédibilité des témoins [Nonverbal Communication and the Credibility of Witnesses]. Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais.
Denault V, Dunbar NE (2017) Nonverbal communication in courtrooms: Scientific assessments or modern trials by ordeal? The Advocates’ Quarterly 47(3): 280–308.
Denault V, Dunbar NE (2019) Credibility assessment and deception detection in courtrooms: Hazards and challenges for scholars and legal practitioners. In Docan-Morgan T (ed) The Handbook of Deceptive Communication. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 915–936.
Denault V, Jupe L (2017) Justice at risk! An evaluation of a pseudoscientific analysis of a witness’ nonverbal behavior in the courtroom. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology 29(2): 221–242.
Denault V, Jupe L (2018) Detecting deceit during trials: Limits in the implementation of lie detection research—A comment on Snook, McCardle, Fahmy and House. Canadian Criminal Law Review 28(1): 97–106.
Denault V, Larivée S, Plouffe D, Plusquellec P (2015) La synergologie, une lecture pseudoscientifique du langage corporel [Synergology, a pseudoscientific reading of body language]. Revue de Psychoéducation 43(2): 425–455.
Denault V, Jupe L, Dodier O, Rochat N (2017) To veil or not to veil, detecting lies in the courtroom: A comment on Leach et al. (2016) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 24(1): 102–117.
Denault V, Plusquellec P, Jupe LM, St-Yves M, Dunbar NE, Hartwig M…van Koppen PJ (2019) The analysis of nonverbal communication: The dangers of pseudoscience in security and justice contexts. Anuario de Psicología Jurídica. Epub ahead of print 30 April 2019. DOI: 10.5093/apj2019a9.
Denault V, Rioux-Turcotte J, Tomas F (in press) La spontanéité du discours, un facteur déterminant la crédibilité des témoins [The spontaneity of discourse, a determining factor of the witnesses’ credibility]. ScriptUM: La revue du Colloque VocUM 2016.
DePaulo BM, Lindsay JL, Malone BE, Muhlenbruck L, Charlton K, Cooper H (2003) Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin 129(1): 74–118.
Emery NJ (2000) The eyes have it: The neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 24(6): 581–604.
Fawcett HE (2014) Witness, False testimony of. In Levine T (ed) Encyclopedia of Deception. Vol 2. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 937–940.
Frank MG, Feeley TH (2003) To catch a liar: Challenges for research in lie detection training. Journal of Applied Communication Research 31(1): 58–75.
Frankel ME (1975) The search for truth: An umpireal view. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 123(5): 1031–1059.
Gerber RJ (1987) Victory vs. truth: The adversary system and its ethic. Arizona State Law Journal 19(1): 3–26.
Hareli S, Hess U (2017) Facial expressions and emotion. In Zeigler-Hill V, Shackelford TK (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Berlin: Springer International Publishing, 1–7.
Harrigan J (2005) Proxemics, kinesics, and gaze. In Harrigan JA, Rosenthal R, Scherer KR (eds) The New Handbook of Methods in Nonverbal Behavior Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 137–198.
Hauch V, Sporer SL, Michael SW, Meissner CA (2016) Does training improve the detection of deception? A meta-analysis. Communication Research 43(3): 283–343.
Henkel LA, Coffman KAJ, Dailey EM (2008) A survey of people’s attitudes and beliefs about false confessions. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 26(5): 555–584.
Jackson J (2012) The Routledge Handbook on Language and Intercultural Communication. Abingdon: Routledge.
Jupe L, Denault V (2018) Science or pseudoscience? A distinction that matters for police officers, lawyers and judges. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Jupe L, Denault V, Dodier O (2018) Credibility, veracity and deception judgments: Why a clear distinction is vital in the justice system. Manuscript in preparation.
Justice LV, Smith HMJ (2018) Memory judgements: the contribution of detail and emotion to assessments of believability and reliability. Memory 26(10): 1402–1415.
Kassin SM (2017) False confessions: How can psychology so basic be so counterintuitive? American Psychologist 72(9): 951–964.
Kendon A (1967) Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica 26: 1–47.
Kleinke CL (1986) Gaze and eye contact: A research review. Psychological Bulletin 100(1): 78–100.
Knapp ML, Hall JA, Horgan TG (2014) Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Kuhn T, Ashcraft KL, Cooren F (2017) The Work of Communication: Relational Perspectives on Working and Organizing in Contemporary Capitalism. New York: Routledge.
Lapakko D (1997) Three cheers for language: A closer examination of a widely cited study of nonverbal communication. Communication Education 46(1): 63–67.
Lapakko D (2007) Communication is 93% nonverbal: An urban legend proliferates. Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal 34: 7–14.
Lardellier P (2017) Enquête sur le business de la communication non verbale: Une analyse critiques des pseudosciences du ‘langage corporel’ [Investigation on the business of nonverbal communication: A critical analysis of ‘body language’ pseudosciences]. Caen: EMS.
Mason MF, Tatkow EP, Macrae CN (2005) The look of love: Gaze shifts and person perception. Psychological Science 16(3): 236–239.
McElhaney JM (1997) Evasive witnesses: Use cross-examination to tell your side of the story. ABA Journal 83(10): 82–83.
Moore N-J, Hickson M, Stacks DW (2014) Nonverbal Communication: Studies and Applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Neal TMS, Christiansen A, Bornstein BH, Robicheaux TR (2012) The effects of mock jurors’ beliefs about eyewitness performance on trial judgments. Psychology, Crime and Law 18(1): 49–64.
Parkinson B (2005) Do facial movements express emotions or communicate motives? Personality and Social Psychology Review 9(4): 278–311.
Patterson ML (1995) A parallel process model of nonverbal communication. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 19(1): 3–29.
Paulson CB, Kiesling SF, Rangel ES (2012) The Handbook of Intercultural Discourse and Communication. Chichester: Blackwell.
Perrett DI, Emery NJ (1994) Understanding the intentions of others from visual signals: Neurophysiological evidence. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition 13(5): 683–694.
Plusquellec P, Denault V (2018) The 1000 most cited papers on visible nonverbal behavior: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 42(3): 347–377.
Porter S, ten Brinke L (2009) Dangerous decisions: A theoretical framework for understanding how judges assess credibility in the courtroom. Legal and Criminological Psychology 14(1): 119–134.
Rioux-Turcotte J, Denault V (2018) L’expertise en linguistique devant les tribunaux québécois et fédéraux canadiens, portrait global et conséquences pour les professionnels du système judiciaire [The linguistic expertise in Quebec and Canadian federal courts, global portrait and consequences for judicial professionals]. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1007/s11196-018-9585-6.
Scheppele KL (1989) Telling stories. Michigan Law Review 87(8): 2073–2098.
Schiffrin D, Tannen D, Hamilton HE (2003) The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell.
Schlegel K, Vicaria IM, Isaacowitz DM, Hall JA (2017) Effectiveness of a short audiovisual emotion recognition training program in adults. Motivation and Emotion 41(5): 646–660.
Sidnell J, Stivers T (2013) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
Small DI (2014) Preparing Witnesses. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
Snook B, McCardle MI, Fahmy W, House JC (2017) Assessing truthfulness on the witness stand: Eradicating deeply rooted pseudoscientific beliefs about credibility assessment by triers of fact. Canadian Criminal Law Review 22(3): 297–306.
Sporer SL, Schwandt B (2007) Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A metaanalytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 13(1): 1–34.
Strömwall LA, Granhag PA (2003) How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychology, Crime and Law 9(1): 19–36.
Sward EE (1989) Values, ideology, and the evolution of the adversary system. Indiana Law Journal 64(2): 301–355.
The Global Deception Research Team. (2006) A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 37(1): 60–74.
Thomas JA (1995) Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Routledge.
Vrij A, Turgeon J (2018) Evaluating credibility of witnesses—Are we instructing jurors on invalid factors? Journal of Tort Law 11(2): 231–244.
Vrij A, Hartwig M, Granhag PA (2019) Reading lies: Nonverbal communication and deception. Annual Review of Psychology 70(1): 295–317.
Younger I (1976) The Art of Cross-examination. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: May 29, 2019
Issue published: January 2020
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in The International Journal of Evidence & Proof.
View All Journal MetricsArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 3221
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 5 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 4
- The use of nonverbal communication when assessing witness credibility: a view from the bench
- Handle with care: Jury deliberation and demeanour-based assessments of witness credibility
- Catching a Liar Through Facial Expression of Fear
- Justice and Nonverbal Communication in a Post-pandemic World: An Evidence-Based Commentary and Cautionary Statement for Lawyers and Judges
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
