Selwin Samuel; Tanushree Chatterjee; Himadri Thapliyal; Priyanka Kacker

doi:10.4103/jfo.jfds_49_19

Authors

Selwin Samuel Institute of Forensic Science, Gujarat Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India
Tanushree Chatterjee Institute of Behavioral Science, Gujarat Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Himadri Thapliyal Institute of Behavioral Science, Gujarat Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Priyanka Kacker Institute of Behavioral Science, Gujarat Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4103/jfo.jfds_49_19

Keywords:

Abstract

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Krauss, RM, Higgins ET, Herman CP, Zanna MP, editors. Impression formation, impression management, and nonverbal behaviors. Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium. Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1981. p. 323‑41.

Porter S, ten Brinke L. The Truth About Lies: What Works in Detecting High‑Stakes Deception. Vol. 15. Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada: University of British Columbia Okanagan Legal and Criminological Psychology; 2010. p. 57‑75.

O’Sullivan M, Ekman P. The wizards of deception detection. In: Granhag PA, Stromwall LA, editors. The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004. p. 269‑86.

Ekman P. Lie catching and micro expressions. The philosophy of deception. Oxford University Press: New York; 2009. p. 118‑33.

Vrij A. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences; 2001.

Frank MG, Ekman P. The ability to detect deceit generalizes across different types of high‑stake lies. J Pers Soc Psychol 1997;72:1429‑39.

Mackersie CL, Calderon‑Moultrie N. Autonomic nervous system reactivity during speech repetition tasks: Heart rate variability and skin conductance. Ear Hear 2016;37 Suppl 1:118S‑25S.

DePaulo BM, Rosenthal R, Rosenkrantz J, Green, CR. Actual and perceived cues to deception: A closer look at speech. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 1982;3:291‑312.

Krapohl DJ, Shaw PK. Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice. Test Question Construction. Ch. 3. Oxford, UK: Academic Press; 2015. p. 61‑79.

American Psychological Association. The Truth about Lie Detectors aka Polygraph Tests. American Psychological Association; 2004. Available from: https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph. [Last accessed on 2019 Jun 07].

Staunton C, Hammond S. An investigation of the guilty knowledge test polygraph examination. J Crim Psychol 2011;1:1‑4.

Vrij A, Ganis G. Theories in deception and lie detection. InCredibility Assessment. Oxford: Academic Press; 2014. p. 301-74.

Synnott J, Dietzel D, Ioannou M. A review of the polygraph: History, methodology and current status. Crime Psychol Rev 2015;1:59‑83.

Bovard PP, Kircher JC, Woltz DJ, Hacker DJ, Cook AE. Effects of direct and indirect questions on the ocular-motor deception test. Polygraph Forensic Credibility Assess Polygraph Forensic Credibility Assess: A J Sci Field Pract 2019;48:40-59.

National Research Council. The polygraph and lie detection. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.

Kahn J, Nelson R, Handler M. An exploration of emotion and cognition during polygraph testing. Polygraph 2009;38:184-97.