Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T19:04:45.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Reality monitoring and detection of deception

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Siegfried L. Sporer
Edited by
Pär Anders Granhag  and
Leif A. Strömwall
Siegfried L. Sporer
Affiliation:
Univerity of Giessen, Germany
Pär Anders Granhag
Affiliation:
Göteborgs Universitet, Sweden
Leif A. Strömwall
Affiliation:
Göteborgs Universitet, Sweden
Get access

Summary

Research on eyewitness testimony has primarily focused on memory errors. In this chapter, the focus is not on eye-witness errors but on the application of Johnson and Raye's (1981) reality monitoring (RM) model to detection of deception. The central question is whether or not it is possible to discriminate truthful from deceptive statements on the basis of content aspects outlined by the RM theory. This approach is akin to Statement Validity Analysis, in particular the Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) component, which also has focused on qualitative differences between truthful and deceptive accounts (for reviews, see Ruby and Brigham, 1997; Sporer, 1983, 1997a, 1997b; Steller and Köhnken, 1989; Vrij, 2000, in press).

Reality monitoring approach

In a seminal paper, Johnson and Raye (1981) asked how people go about discriminating memories of externally derived (perceptual) experiences from memories of internally derived experiences. This process has been termed reality monitoring (RM). In a deception situation, a communicator constructs an event either from scratch or on the basis of similar experiences, thus reporting on a new current event, not a memory of a past event. According to RM theory, people rely on qualitative characteristics of memories to decide whether a memory is based on an actual experience or not. It is assumed that externally derived memories contain more references to sensory information (visual details, colours, sounds, odours, touch, taste), contextual information (about space and time), emotions and feelings, and semantic information.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts , pp. 64 - 102
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alonso-Quecuty, M. (1992). Deception detection and reality monitoring: A new answer to an old question? In F. Loesel, D. Bender, and T. Bliesener (eds.), Psychology and law: International perspectives (pp. 228–332). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRef
Alonso-Quecuty, M. (1993). Psicología forense experimental: El efecto de la demora en la toma de declaración y el grado de elaboración de la misma sobre los testimonios verdaderos y falsos [Experimental forensic psychology: The effect of delay and preparation of a statement upon truthful and deceptive testimonies]. In M. García (ed.), Psicología social aplicada en los procesos jurídicos y políticos (pp. 81–8). Sevilla: Eudema
Alonso-Quecuty, M. (1996). Detecting fact from fallacy in child and adult witness accounts. In G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, M. McMurran, and C. Wilson (eds.), Psychology, law and criminal justice. International developments in research and practice (pp. 74–80). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRef
Alonso-Quecuty, M. L., and Hernández-Fernaud, E. (1997). Tócala otra vez Sam: Repitiendo las mentiras [Play it again Sam: Retelling a lie]. Estudios de Psicología, 57, 29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Quecuty, M. L., Hernández-Fernaud, E., and Campos, L. (1997). Child witnesses: Lying about something heard. In S. Redondo, V. Garrio, J. Pérez, and R. Barbaret (eds.), Advances in psychology and law: International contributions (pp. 129–35). Berlin: Walter de GruyterCrossRef
Anderson, S. J., and Conway, M. A. (1997). Representation of autobiographical memories. In M. A. Conway, (ed.), Cognitive models of memory (pp. 217–46). Hove: Psychology Press
Arntzen, F. (1970/1993). Psychologie der Zeugenaussage. Systematik der Glaubwuerdigkeitsmerkmale [Psychology of eyewitness testimony. System of credibility criteria] (1st/3rd edn). Munich: C. H. Beck
Biland, C., Py, J., and Rimboud, S. (1999). Evaluer la sincérité d'un témoin grâce à trois techniques d'analyse, verbales et non verbale [Evaluating a witness's sincerity with three verbal and nonverbal techniques]. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 49, 115–21Google Scholar
Brewer, W. F. (1986). What is autobiographical memory? In D. C. Rubin (ed.), Autobiographical memory (pp. 25–49). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef
Brewer, W. F. (1996). What is recollective memory? In D. C. Rubin (ed.), Remembering our past: Studies in autobiographical memory (pp. 19–66). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRef
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, M. A. (1990). Autobiographical memory: An introduction. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press
DePaulo, B. M., and Friedman, H. S. (1998). Nonverbal communication. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (eds.), Handbook of social psychology, 4th edn, Vol. II (pp. 3–40). New York: Random House
DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., and Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donaldson, W. (1992). Measuring recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 275–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiedler, K. (1989a). Luegendetektion aus alltagspsychologischer Sicht [Lie detection based on commonsense]. Psychologische Rundschau, 40, 127–40Google Scholar
Fiedler, K. (1989b). Suggestion and credibility: Lie detection based on content-related cues. In V. A. Gheorghiu, P. Netter, H. J. Eysenck, and R. Rosenthal (eds.), Suggestion and suggestibility: Theory and research (pp. 323–35). Berlin: Springer
Fisher, R. P., and Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The Cognitive Interview. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas
Fiske, S. T., and Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill
Fivush, R., and Shukat, J. R. (1995). Content, consistency, and coherence of early autobiographical recall. In M. S. Zaragoza, J. R. Graham, G. C. N. Hall, R. Hirschman, and Y. S. BenPorath (eds.), Memory and testimony in the child witness (pp. 5–23). London: Sage
Gilbert, D. T. (1995). Attribution and interpersonal perception. In A. Tesser (ed.), Advanced social psychology (pp. 99–147). Boston: McGraw-Hill
Granhag, P. A., Stroemwall, L., and Olsson, C. (2001, June). Fact or fiction? Adults' ability to assess children's veracity. Paper presented at the 11th European Conference on Psychology and Law in Lisbon, Portugal
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. III: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Seminar Press
Johnson, M. K., and Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. K., and Suengas, A. (1989). Reality monitoring judgments of other people's memories. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 2, 107–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. K., Bush, J. G., and Mitchell, K. J. (1998). Interpersonal reality monitoring: Judging the sources of other people's memories. Social Cognition, 16, 199–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. K., Foley, M. A., Suengas, A. G., and Raye, C. L. (1988). Phenomenal characteristics of memories for perceived and imagined autobiographical events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 371–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., and Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3–28CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keogh, L., and Markham, R. (1998). Judgements of other people's memory reports: Differences in reports as a function of imagery vividness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 159–713.0.CO;2-J>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, M. L., Hart, R. P., and Dennis, H. S. (1974). An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 1, 15–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köhnken, G. (1990). Glaubwuerdigkeit [Credibility]. Munich: Psychologie Verlags Union
Kuepper, B., and Sporer, S. L. (1995). Beurteileruebereinstimmung bei Glaubwuerdigkeitsmerkmalen: Eine empirische Studie [Interrater agreement for credibility criteria: An empirical study]. In G. Bierbrauer, W. Gottwald, and B. Birnbreier-Stahlberger (eds.), Verfahrensgerechtigkeit – Rechtspsychologische Forschungsbeitraege für die Justizpraxis (pp. 187–213). Cologne: Otto Schmidt Verlag
Landry, K. and Brigham, J. C. (1992). The effect of training in Criteria-Based Content Analysis on the ability to detect deception in adults. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 663–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, S. F. (1998). What is it like to remember? On phenomenal qualities of memory. In C. P. Thompson, D. J. Herrmann, D. Bruce, J. D. Read, D. G. Payne, and M. P. Toglia (eds.), Autobiographical memory: Theoretical and applied perspectives (pp. 163–90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Lindsay, D. S. (2002). Children's source monitoring. In H. L. Westcott, G. M. Davies, and R. H. C. Bull (eds), Children's testimony (pp. 83–98). Chichester, England: WileyCrossRef
MacMillan, N. A., and Creelman, C. D. (1990). Response bias: Characteristics of detection theory, threshold theory, and ‘nonparametric’ indexes. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 401–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacMillan, N. A., (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. New York: Cambridge University Press
Marks, D. F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 17–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Masip, J.Sporer, S. L., Garrido, E., and Herrero, C. (in press). The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: A review of the empirical evidence. Psychology, Crime, and Law
McGinnis, D., and Roberts, P. (1996). Qualitative characteristics of vivid memories attributed to real and imagined experiences. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 59–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNicol, D. (1972). A primer of signal detection theory. London: George Allen, and Unwin
Meissner, C. A., and Kassin, S. (2002). ‘He's guilty!’. Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 469–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pezdek, K. (1994). The illusion of memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 339–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pezdek, K., and Taylor, J. (2000). In D. F. Bjorklund (ed.), False-memory creation in children and adults. Theory, research, and implication (pp. 69–91). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Pontari, B. A., and Schlenker, B. R. (2000). The influence of cognitive load on self-presentation: Can cognitive busyness help as well as harm social performance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1092–108CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinhard, M.-A., Burghardt, K., Sporer, S. L., and Bursch, S. E. (2002). Luegst Du? Glaubwuerdigkeitsbeurteilung im Alltag [Are you lying to me? Credibility assessment in everyday life]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 33, 169–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggio, R. E., and Friedman, H. (1983). Individual differences and cues to deception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 899–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruby, C. L., and Brigham, J. C. (1997). The usefulness of the Criteria-Based Content Analysis technique in distinguishing between truthful and fabricated allegations. A critical review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 705–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santtila, P., Roppola, H., and Niemi, P. (1999). Assessing the truthfulness of witness statements made by children (aged 7–8, 10–11, and 13–14) employing scales derived from Johnson and Raye's model of Reality Monitoring. Expert Evidence, 6, 273–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, B. R., and Weigold, M. F. (1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 133–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schooler, J. W., Clark, C., and Loftus, E. F. (1988). Knowing when memory is real. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, and R. N. Sykes (eds.), Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues, Vol. I, S. (pp. 83–8). Chichester: Wiley
Schooler, J. W., Gerhard, D., and Loftus, E. F. (1986). Qualities of the unreal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 171–81Google ScholarPubMed
Semin, G. R., and Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic category model, its bases, applications and range. European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semin, G. R., and Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 558–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sporer, S. L. (1983, August). Content criteria of credibility: The German approach to eyewitness testimony. Paper presented in G. S. Goodman (Chair), The child witness: Psychological and legal issues. Symposium presented at the 91st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association in Anaheim, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
Sporer, S. L. (1997a). The less traveled road to truth: Verbal cues in deception detection in accounts of fabricated and self-experienced events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 373–973.0.CO;2-0>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sporer, S. L. (1997b). Realitaetsueberwachungskriterien und forensische Glaubwuerdigkeitskriterien im Vergleich: Validitaetueberpruefung anhand selbst erlebter und erfundener Geschichten [Comparing reality monitoring criteria and forensic credibility criteria: Validity experiments with self-experienced and invented accounts]. In L. Greuel, T. Fabian, and M. Stadler (eds.), Psychologie der Zeugenaussage (pp. 71–85). Munich: Psychologie Verlags Union
Sporer, S. L. (1998, March). Detecting deception with the Aberdeen Report Judgement Scales (ARJS): Theoretical development, reliability and validity. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society in Redondo Beach, CA
Sporer, S. L., and Bursch, S. E. (1996, April). Detection of deception by verbal means: Before and after training. Paper presented at the 38. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen in Eichstaett, Germany
Sporer, S. L., and Hamilton, S. C. (1996, June). Should I believe this? Reality monitoring of invented and self-experienced events from early and late teenage years. Poster presented at the NATO Advanced Study Institute in Port de Bourgenay, France
Sporer, S. L., and Kuepper, B. (1994, September). Fantasie und Wirklichkeit – Erinnerungsqualitaeten von wahren und erfundenen Geschichten [Fantasy and reality – memory qualities of true and invented stories]. Paper presented at the 39th Congress of the German Psychological Association in Hamburg
Sporer, S. L., and Kuepper, B. (1995). Realitaetsueberwachung und die Beurteilung des Wahrheitsgehaltes von Erzaehlungen: Eine experimentelle Studie [Reality monitoring and the judgment of credibility of stories: An experimental investigation]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 26, 173–93Google Scholar
Sporer, S. L., and Kuepper, B. (2004). Fantasie und Wirklichkeit – Erinnerungsqualitaeten von wahren und erfundenen Geschichten. [Fantasy and reality – memory qualities of true and invented stories]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 1, 212, 135–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sporer, S. L., Bursch, S. E., Schreiber, N., Weiss, P. E., Hoefer, E., Sievers, K., and Köhnken, G. (2000). Detecting deception with the Aberdeen Report Judgement Scales (ARJS): Inter-rater reliability. In A. Czerederecka, T. Jaskiewicz-Obydzinska, and J. Wojcikiewicz (eds.), Forensic psychology and law. Traditional questions and new ideas (pp. 197–204). Krakow: Institute of Forensic Research Publishers
Sporer, S. L., Kuepper, B., and Bursch, S. E. (1995, April). Hilft Wissen ueber Realitaetsueberwachung, um zwischen wahren und erfundenen Geschichten zu unterscheiden? [Does knowledge about reality monitoring help to discriminate between true and invented stories?] Paper presented at the 37th Meeting of Experimental Psychologists in Bochum, Germany
Sporer, S. L., Stucke, T. S., and Semweber, M. C. (2000). Individual differences in self-monitoring and content-oriented detection of deception. Paper presented at the 10th European Conference of Psychology and Law in Limassol, Cyprus
Steller, M., and Köhnken, G. (1989). Criteria-based statement analysis. Credibility assessment of children's statements in sexual abuse cases. In D. C. Raskin (ed.), Psychological methods for investigation and evidence (pp. 217–45). New York: Springer
Steller, M., Wellershaus, P., and Wolf, T. (1992). Realkennzeichen in Kinderaussagen: Empirische Grundlage der Kriterienorientierten Aussageanalyse [Reality criteria in children's statements: The empirical basis of criteria-oriented statement analysis]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 39, 151–70Google Scholar
Strömwall, L. A., Bengtsson, L., Leander, L., and Granhag, P. A. (in press). Assessing children's statements: The impact of a repeated experience on CBCA and RM ratings. Applied Cognitive Psychology
Undeutsch, U. (1967). Beurteilung der Glaubhaftigkeit von Aussagen [Evaluation of the credibility of statements]. In U. Undeutsch (ed.), Handbuch der Psychologie: Vol. 11. Forensische Psychologie (pp. 26–181). Goettingen: Hogrefe
Undeutsch, U. (1982). Statement reality analysis. In A. Trankell (ed.), Reconstructing the past: The role of psychologists in criminal trials (pp. 27–56). Deventer, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit. The psychology of lying and the implications for professional practice. Chichester: John Wiley
Vrij, A., and Holland, M. (1999). Individual differences in persistence in lying and experiences while deceiving. Communication Research Reports, 3, 299–308Google Scholar
Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., and Morris, P. (1997). Individual differences in hand movements during deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 21, 87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., and Bull, R. (in press). Detecting deceit via analyses of verbal and nonverbal behavior in children and adults. Human Communication Research
Vrij, A., Edward, K., and Bull, R. (2001). Stereotypical verbal and nonverbal responses while deceiving others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 899–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrij, A., Edward, K., Roberts, K. P., and Bull, R. (2000). Detecting deceit via analysis of verbal and nonverbal behavior. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 239–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallbott, H. G. (1998). Die ‘Leakage’-Hypothese – Zum aktuellen Forschungsstand [The ‘leakage’ hypothesis – its current research status]. In A. Spitznagel (ed.), Geheimnis und Geheimhaltung (pp. 197–216). Göttingen: Hogrefe

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×