Detecting Deception in Person-of-Interest Statements

  title={Detecting Deception in Person-of-Interest Statements},
  author={Christie M. Fuller and David P. Biros and M. Adkins and J. Burgoon and J. Nunamaker and S. Coulon},
  • Christie M. Fuller, David P. Biros, +3 authors S. Coulon
  • Published in ISI 2006
  • Computer Science
  • Most humans cannot detect lies at a rate better than chance. Alternative methods of deception detection may increase accuracy, but are intrusive, do not offer immediate feedback, or may not be useful in all situations. Automated classification methods have been suggested as an alternative to address these issues, but few studies have tested their utility with real-world, high-stakes statements. The current paper reports preliminary results from classification of actual security police… CONTINUE READING
    8 Citations

    Tables from this paper

    Automated deception detection of 911 call transcripts
    • 13
    • PDF
    Potential noncontact tools for rapid credibility assessment from physiological and behavioral cues
    • 7
    Emotions in Speech: Juristic Implications
    • 5


    Cues to deception.
    • 1,903
    • PDF
    Detecting deception in secondary screening interviews using linguistic analysis
    • 6
    • PDF
    A Comparison of Classification Methods for Predicting Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication
    • 215
    • PDF
    A Few Can Catch a Liar
    • 382
    Advances in automated deception detection in text-based computer-mediated communication
    • 19
    • PDF
    Detecting Deceit via Analysis of Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior
    • 362
    • PDF
    Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception
    • 1,043
    Interpersonal Deception Theory
    • 811
    A history of lie detection.
    • 124
    • PDF