Forensics Journal - Stevenson University 2010 | Page 34

STEVENSON UNIVERSITY

Horvath, F. (1979). Effect of different motivational instructions on
detection of deception with the psychological stress evaluator and the
galvanic skin response. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 323-330.

CONCLUSION
While the findings may be interpreted as indicative of behavioral
tendencies of deception, and it would be tempting to create a profile
of the “typical liar,” it would be unwise for an investigator to attach
specific meaning to any one index or even to a constellation of them.
Just as with results from any investigative tool, information gleaned
from interviews should be considered suggestive, or perhaps even
presumptive. But in any event, hypotheses (e.g. hunches, suspicions)
generated from interviews should be corroborated with other information, when available, in order to make prudent decisions guiding
an investigation’s direction.

Horvath, F., Jayne, B., & Buckley, J. (1994). Differentiation of truthful and deceptive criminal suspects in behavior analysis interviews.
Journal of Forensic Sciences, 39, 793-807.
Horvath, F. S. (1973). Verbal and nonverbal clues to truth and deception during polygraph examinations. Journal of Police Science and
Administration, 1, 138-152.
Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. P. (2001). Criminal interrogations and confessions. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.

REFERENCES
Aamodt, M. G., & Custer, H. (2006). Who can best catch a liar?
Forensic Examiner, 15(1), 6-11.

Leo, R. A. (2001). False confessions: Causes, consequences, and
solutions. In S. D. Westervelt & J. A. Humphrey, Wrongly convicted:
Perspectives on failed justice. (pp. 36-54). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press.

Blair, J. P., & Kooi, B. (2004). The gap between training and the
detection of deception. International Journal of Police Science &
Management, 6(2), 77-83.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical
papers. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Lykken, D. (2006). Nothing like the truth. New Scientist, 183(2460).

DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L.,
Charlon, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues of deception. Psychological
Bulletin, 129(1), 74-118.

Lykken, D. T. (1959). The GSR in the detection of guilt. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 43, 385-388.

Freckelton, I. (2003, November). The closing of the coffin on forensic polygraph evidence for Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law,
359-366.

Navarro, J., & Schafer, J. R. (2001). Detecting deception. FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin, 70(7), 9-13.
Trovillo, P. V. (1939). A history of lie detection. Journal of Criminal
Law and Criminology, 29, 848-881.

Greely, H. T., & Illes, J. (2007). Neuroscience-basedlie detection: The
urgent need for regulation. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 33,
377-431.

U.S. Department of Labor. (2008). Retrieved July 2, 2008, from
http://www.dol.gov//.pdf

Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and the
implications for professional practice. New York: Wiley.

Horvath, F. (1978). An experimental comparison of the psychological
stress evaluator and the galvanic skin response in detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 338-344.

32