Premium
A critical analysis of the Model Statement literature: Should this tool be used in practice?
Author(s) -
Porter Cody Normitta,
Taylor Rachel,
Salvanelli Giacomo
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of investigative psychology and offender profiling
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.479
H-Index - 22
eISSN - 1544-4767
pISSN - 1544-4759
DOI - 10.1002/jip.1563
Subject(s) - statement (logic) , scripting language , diversity (politics) , psychology , conjunction (astronomy) , outcome (game theory) , computer science , lie detection , range (aeronautics) , data science , social psychology , applied psychology , cognitive psychology , deception , epistemology , sociology , engineering , mathematics , philosophy , physics , mathematical economics , astronomy , anthropology , operating system , aerospace engineering
Abstract Investigators need to elicit detailed statements from interviewees to find potential leads, whilst simultaneously judging if a statement is genuine or fabricated. Researchers have proposed that the Model Statement (MS) can both (a) increase information elicitation from interviewees and (b) amplify the verbal differences between liars and truth tellers, thereby enhancing lie‐detection accuracy. Based upon a critical analysis of the MS literature, we argue that this tool is not currently ready for practical usage, as its utility has not been fully established. We highlight a diverse range of existing MS scripts, and a greater diversity in the dependent measures examined in conjunction with this tool. More robust replications of these procedures are needed. We also highlight why some measures of verbal content may not be suitable as outcome measures and suggest that new research could use the well‐established reality monitoring criteria to allow for standardisation across studies.