219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27193132)
1. Catching a Deceiver in the Act: Processes Underlying Deception in an Interactive Interview Setting.
Ströfer S; Ufkes EG; Noordzij ML; Giebels E
Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback; 2016 Sep; 41(3):349-62. PubMed ID: 27193132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Deceptive Intentions: Can Cues to Deception Be Measured before a Lie Is Even Stated?
Ströfer S; Noordzij ML; Ufkes EG; Giebels E
PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0125237. PubMed ID: 26018573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Interviewing Suspects with Avatars: Avatars Are More Effective When Perceived as Human.
Ströfer S; Ufkes EG; Bruijnes M; Giebels E; Noordzij ML
Front Psychol; 2016; 7():545. PubMed ID: 27148150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cues to deception and ability to detect lies as a function of police interview styles.
Vrij A; Mann S; Kristen S; Fisher RP
Law Hum Behav; 2007 Oct; 31(5):499-518. PubMed ID: 17211691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A truth that's told with bad intent: an ERP study of deception.
Carrión RE; Keenan JP; Sebanz N
Cognition; 2010 Jan; 114(1):105-10. PubMed ID: 19836013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A reverse order interview does not aid deception detection regarding intentions.
Fenn E; McGuire M; Langben S; Blandón-Gitlin I
Front Psychol; 2015; 6():1298. PubMed ID: 26379610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: the benefit of recalling an event in reverse order.
Vrij A; Mann SA; Fisher RP; Leal S; Milne R; Bull R
Law Hum Behav; 2008 Jun; 32(3):253-65. PubMed ID: 17694424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Statements about true and false intentions: using the Cognitive Interview to magnify the differences.
Sooniste T; Granhag PA; Strömwall LA; Vrij A
Scand J Psychol; 2015 Aug; 56(4):371-8. PubMed ID: 25929812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effects of sketching while narrating on information elicitation and deception detection in multiple interviews.
Deeb H; Vrij A; Leal S; Burkhardt J
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2021 Feb; 213():103236. PubMed ID: 33360343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. An empirical test of the behaviour analysis interview.
Vrij A; Mann S; Fisher RP
Law Hum Behav; 2006 Jun; 30(3):329-45. PubMed ID: 16718581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cues to deception: can complications, common knowledge details, and self-handicapping strategies discriminate between truths, embedded lies and outright lies in an Italian-speaking sample?
Caso L; Cavagnis L; Vrij A; Palena N
Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1128194. PubMed ID: 37179853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effects of a model statement on information elicitation and deception detection in multiple interviews.
Deeb H; Vrij A; Leal S
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2020 Jun; 207():103080. PubMed ID: 32413731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The reliability of lie detection performance.
Leach AM; Lindsay RC; Koehler R; Beaudry JL; Bala NC; Lee K; Talwar V
Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):96-109. PubMed ID: 18594955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A stability bias effect among deceivers.
Harvey AC; Vrij A; Hope L; Leal S; Mann S
Law Hum Behav; 2017 Dec; 41(6):519-529. PubMed ID: 28726439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Lying relies on the truth.
Debey E; De Houwer J; Verschuere B
Cognition; 2014 Sep; 132(3):324-34. PubMed ID: 24859237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Are computers effective lie detectors? A meta-analysis of linguistic cues to deception.
Hauch V; Blandón-Gitlin I; Masip J; Sporer SL
Pers Soc Psychol Rev; 2015 Nov; 19(4):307-42. PubMed ID: 25387767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The honest truth about deception: Demographic, cognitive, and neural correlates of child repeated deceptive behavior.
Thijssen S; Wildeboer A; van IJzendoorn MH; Muetzel RL; Langeslag SJE; Jaddoe VWV; Verhulst FC; Tiemeier H; Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ; White T
J Exp Child Psychol; 2017 Oct; 162():225-241. PubMed ID: 28623779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The inhibitory spillover effect: Controlling the bladder makes better liars.
Fenn E; Blandón-Gitlin I; Coons J; Pineda C; Echon R
Conscious Cogn; 2015 Dec; 37():112-22. PubMed ID: 26366466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The cognitive mechanisms underlying deception: an event-related potential study.
Suchotzki K; Crombez G; Smulders FT; Meijer E; Verschuere B
Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Mar; 95(3):395-405. PubMed ID: 25661698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Detecting false intentions using unanticipated questions.
Bogaard G; van der Mark J; Meijer EH
PLoS One; 2019; 14(12):e0226257. PubMed ID: 31825997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
