The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Police lie detection accuracy: The effect of lie scenario.
Abstract
Although most people are not better than chance in detecting deception, some groups of police professionals have demonstrated significant lie detection accuracy. One reason for this difference may be that the types of lies police are asked to judge in scientific experiments often do not represent the types of lies they see in their profession. Across 23 studies, involving 31 different police groups in eight countries, police officers tested with lie detection scenarios using high stakes lies (i.e., the lie was personally involving and/or resulted in substantial rewards or punishments for the liar) were significantly more accurate than law enforcement officials tested with low stakes lies. Face validity and construct validity of various lie scenarios are differentiated.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74 · Cited by 2,479
Accuracy of Deception Judgments
Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2 · Cited by 1,953
Cited by
OFF-ApexNet on micro-expression recognition system
Gan, Y. S., Liong, S.-T., Yau, W.-C., Huang, Y.-C., & Tan, L.-K. (2019) · Signal Processing: Image Communication · doi:10.1016/j.image.2019.02.005 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- O'Sullivan, M., Frank, M. G., Hurley, C. M., & Tiwana, J.
- Venue
- Law and Human Behavior
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 530-538
- ISSN
- 0147-7307 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-661X
- OpenAlex
- W2151564195
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Police lie detection accuracy: The effect of lie scenario. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10979-008-9166-4
- The paper
- O'Sullivan, M., Frank, M. G., Hurley, C. M., & Tiwana, J. (2009). Police lie detection accuracy: The effect of lie scenario. Law and Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9166-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
