detecting deception method

Project Id:

1118502

Posted By:

fblfmgv

Project Title:

detecting deception method

Writing Type:

Original

Project Type:

Gold

Status:

IN PROGRESS

Subject:

Psychology

Number Of Pages:

2     Double-spaced (600 words)

Number Of Sources:

0

Type of Document:

Lab Report

Academic Level:

College/University

Citation Style:

Unknown

Attachment(s):

N/A

Solution Files(s):

N/A

Description:

Video Link that the lab report is based on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIB_Q7l57uY Watch interview B and create the method part of a lab report. I have asked you to be the participants in the study and watch interview B, recording how many times the non-verbal cues of detecting deception in the table appear in interview B (please note that you are looking for how many cues appear, not whether they appear or not. So, I am looking for numeric values, rather than yes or no answers) I have attached the introduction part of the lab report you could read it.

 

here you go. Did u manage to look at the video? You can write everything in a word documentI couldn’t include it gives me error. I will copy and paste it below : Deception has been a part of human civilisation for a very long time. In most instances, it is deterring factor to progress in investigations and relationships. Therefore, researchers have sought to determine the relationship between deception and various non-verbal and auditory cues. However, people’s ability to detect lies still raises numerous questions and debates that try to validate or invalidate the truth behind this claim. These debates and inquiries have been spearheaded by crime investigators seeking to find the accurate facts behind deception detection. If the detection deception is a possible measure to execute accurately, then the criminal investigation department might benefit heavily. Detection deception is thus an important concept in a society that should be comprehensively understood through studies to determine its accuracy and applicability in society. One such study focuses on determining how good one can be in detecting deception using the current techniques and theories. Traditionally, it is perceived that detection deception is primarily founded on the assumption that a liar will always exhibit non-verbal or auditory cues that are stress-based. This is because they fear being caught or are extremely feeling guilty. This has been the founding principle behind detection deception techniques and theories being applied today. For example, detecting deception from non-verbal cues claims that a lying individual will be psychologically disoriented, leading to various actions that indicate the individual is lying (Borza et al., 2013, 2913). Generally, observations of non-verbal cues often depend on an established baseline of what is considered normal for the person under investigation. When a baseline is established, the investigator is thus permitted to study how the suspect’s baseline of normal changes. The deviations from the established normal will indicate whether the individual under investigation suppresses or changes the truth. Deviations from the baseline are often observed through different non-verbal channels such as facial expressions and body language. For instance, brief and involuntary micro-expressions might leak, indicating a contrary message to the one being communicated. Based on numerous studies, leakages of these brief expressions of one’s true emotions are the best way to determine and conclude whether one is lying or not (Zimmerman, 2016, 47). Another effective non-verbal cue used to detect deceit is the displaying of false expressions. For instance, an individual may express happiness through smiling, yet the eye muscles do not concur. Therefore, fabricated smiles that are very difficult to discern are an effective measure used by deceptive individuals to conceal the truth. Moreover, other extreme indicators such as fidgeting, sweating, and trembling when communicating are noted. Investigators are thus needed to be keen in detecting fake smiles from suspects under investigations. Observational auditory cues are also effective measures used to determine deceit from an individual. Like the non-verbal cues, auditory cues should also be discerned after the normal baseline has been established. A normal baseline will ensure deviations are easily detected to determine whether deceit is in play. A good example of auditory cues used to detect deceit is the evidence of inconsistency with the available evidence. An individual who is hiding or changing the truth is likely to utter information that contradicts the facts available (Hicks and Ulvestad, 2011, 65). A conflict between the message being uttered and verbal cues being presented. For example, raised vocal codes when the individual claims not to be angry. This clash might be an indicator of a deceitful individual trying to suppress his/her true emotions. Verbal cues that indicate deception also exhibit a likelihood for less detailed information when answering questions. For instance, a lying individual will avoid mentioning more details compared to a truth-teller. This is because of the fear of uttering incriminating details; therefore, communication will be regulated and monitored. Among less experienced liars, various extreme observable vocal factors will be noted. For instance, trembling vocal notes will be a good indicator of a deceptive individual when lying. The above indicators have been widely used and accepted as the primary detectors of deception during investigations. For instance, in the research paper, Alicia Nortje and Colin Tredoux (2019), “How good are we at detecting deception? A review of current techniques and theories” has comprehensively availed the above indicators as the primary and current techniques and theories used to detect deception. However, the authors’ claim on baseline used to determine and establish a suspect’s