A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection?

Sarah Jordan; Laure Brimbal; D. Brian Wallace; Saul M. Kassin; Maria Hartwig; Chris N. H. Street

doi:10.1002/jip.1532

A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection?

Sarah Jordan, Laure Brimbal, D. Brian Wallace, Saul M. Kassin, Maria Hartwig, Chris N. H. Street

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the micro‐expressions training tool (METT) in identifying and using micro‐expressions to improve lie detection. Participants (n = 90) were randomly assigned to receive training in micro‐expressions recognition, a bogus control training, or no training. All participants made veracity judgements of five randomly selected videos of targets providing deceptive or truthful statements. With the use of the Bayesian analyses, we found that the METT group did not outperform those in the bogus training and no training groups. Further, overall accuracy was slightly below chance. Implications of these results are discussed.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	222-235
Number of pages	14
Journal	Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
Volume	16
Issue number	3
Early online date	20 Aug 2019
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1532
Publication status	Published - 1 Oct 2019

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1002/jip.1532Licence: Other

accepted manuscriptAccepted author manuscript, 425 KBLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{38e1a26077164891963d8dd64466900e,

title = "A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection?",

abstract = "The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the micro‐expressions training tool (METT) in identifying and using micro‐expressions to improve lie detection. Participants (n = 90) were randomly assigned to receive training in micro‐expressions recognition, a bogus control training, or no training. All participants made veracity judgements of five randomly selected videos of targets providing deceptive or truthful statements. With the use of the Bayesian analyses, we found that the METT group did not outperform those in the bogus training and no training groups. Further, overall accuracy was slightly below chance. Implications of these results are discussed.",

keywords = "micro-expressions, lie detection, deception, emotion, SPOT, security, facial expression, micro-expressions training tool, training",

author = "Sarah Jordan and Laure Brimbal and Wallace, {D. Brian} and Kassin, {Saul M.} and Maria Hartwig and Street, {Chris N. H.}",

year = "2019",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1002/jip.1532",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "222--235",

journal = "Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling",

issn = "1544-4759",

publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A test of the micro-expressions training tool

T2 - Does it improve lie detection?

AU - Jordan, Sarah

AU - Brimbal, Laure

AU - Wallace, D. Brian

AU - Kassin, Saul M.

AU - Hartwig, Maria

AU - Street, Chris N. H.

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the micro‐expressions training tool (METT) in identifying and using micro‐expressions to improve lie detection. Participants (n = 90) were randomly assigned to receive training in micro‐expressions recognition, a bogus control training, or no training. All participants made veracity judgements of five randomly selected videos of targets providing deceptive or truthful statements. With the use of the Bayesian analyses, we found that the METT group did not outperform those in the bogus training and no training groups. Further, overall accuracy was slightly below chance. Implications of these results are discussed.

AB - The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the micro‐expressions training tool (METT) in identifying and using micro‐expressions to improve lie detection. Participants (n = 90) were randomly assigned to receive training in micro‐expressions recognition, a bogus control training, or no training. All participants made veracity judgements of five randomly selected videos of targets providing deceptive or truthful statements. With the use of the Bayesian analyses, we found that the METT group did not outperform those in the bogus training and no training groups. Further, overall accuracy was slightly below chance. Implications of these results are discussed.

KW - micro-expressions

KW - lie detection

KW - deception

KW - emotion

KW - SPOT

KW - security

KW - facial expression

KW - micro-expressions training tool

KW - training

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070901241&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jip.1532

DO - 10.1002/jip.1532

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 222

EP - 235

JO - Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling

JF - Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling

SN - 1544-4759

IS - 3

ER -

A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection?

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Study finds flaws in leading security lie detection training tool

Cite this

A test of the micro-expressions training tool: Does it improve lie detection?

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Press/Media

Study finds flaws in leading security lie detection training tool

Cite this