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 investigations collected under high stakes and proposes stages for conducting future analyses. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006.
CITATION STYLE
Fuller, C., Biros, D. P., Adkins, M., Burgoon, J. K., Nunamaker, J. F., & Coulon, S. (2006). Detecting deception in person-of-interest statements. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 3975 LNCS, pp. 504–509). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/11760146_48
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.