Rights statement: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Warmelink, L. , Subramanian, A. , Tkacheva, D. and McLatchie, N. (2019), Unexpected questions in deception detection interviews: Does question order matter?. Leg Crim Psychol. doi:10.1111/lcrp.12151 which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/lcrp.12151 This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.
Accepted author manuscript, 925 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Unexpected questions in deception detection interviews
T2 - Does question order matter?
AU - Warmelink, Lara Natasja
AU - Subramanian, Anna
AU - Tkacheva, Daria
AU - McLatchie, Neil Marvin
N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Warmelink, L. , Subramanian, A. , Tkacheva, D. and McLatchie, N. (2019), Unexpected questions in deception detection interviews: Does question order matter?. Leg Crim Psychol. doi:10.1111/lcrp.12151 which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/lcrp.12151 This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Purpose. Unexpected questions have been shown to increase cues to deception,without reducing the information given by truth tellers. Two studies investigated whether the detail given by an interviewee is affected by whether the expected or unexpected questions are asked first.Methods. In Study 1, participants (N = 85) were interviewed about their ownintentions, and in Study 2, participants (N = 84) were given an intention by theexperimenter. They were then interviewed.Results. Results showed that in both studies, differences between the expected-first and the unexpected-first order were minimal and lie detection accuracy was not improved by asking the unexpected questions first.Conclusions. These results offer important information for forensic interviewers,showing that there is no need to ask unexpected questions at a certain point in theinterview. Link to associated OSF page: https://osf.io/93g7h/?view_only=586daff060d846efb760c8155478ce9e.
AB - Purpose. Unexpected questions have been shown to increase cues to deception,without reducing the information given by truth tellers. Two studies investigated whether the detail given by an interviewee is affected by whether the expected or unexpected questions are asked first.Methods. In Study 1, participants (N = 85) were interviewed about their ownintentions, and in Study 2, participants (N = 84) were given an intention by theexperimenter. They were then interviewed.Results. Results showed that in both studies, differences between the expected-first and the unexpected-first order were minimal and lie detection accuracy was not improved by asking the unexpected questions first.Conclusions. These results offer important information for forensic interviewers,showing that there is no need to ask unexpected questions at a certain point in theinterview. Link to associated OSF page: https://osf.io/93g7h/?view_only=586daff060d846efb760c8155478ce9e.
KW - deception
KW - interviews
U2 - 10.1111/lcrp.12151
DO - 10.1111/lcrp.12151
M3 - Journal article
VL - 24
SP - 258
EP - 272
JO - Legal and Criminological Psychology
JF - Legal and Criminological Psychology
SN - 1355-3259
IS - 2
ER -