scholarly journals Association-based Concealed Information Test: A Novel Reaction Time-Based Deception Detection Method

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gáspár Lukács ◽  
Bartosz Gula ◽  
Emese Szegedi-Hallgató ◽  
Gábor Csifcsák
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gáspár Lukács ◽  
Bartosz Gula ◽  
Emese Szegedi-Hallgató ◽  
Gábor Csifcsák

In recent years, numerous studies were published on the reaction time (RT)-based Concealed Information Test (CIT). However, an important limitation of the CIT is the reliance on the recognition of the probe item, and therefore the limited applicability when an innocent person is aware of this item. In the present paper, we introduce an RT-based CIT that is based on item-category associations: the Association-based Concealed Information Test (A-CIT). Using the participants’ given names as probe items and self-referring “inducer” items (e.g., “MINE” or “ME”) that establish an association between ownership and responses choices, in Experiment 1 (within-subject design; n = 27), this method differentiated with high accuracy between guilty and innocent conditions. Experiment 2 (n = 25) replicated Experiment 1, except that the participants were informed of the probe item in the innocent condition—nonetheless, the accuracy rate remained high. Implications and future possibilities are discussed.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gáspár Lukács

The Association-Based Concealed Information Test (A-CIT) is a deception-detection method, in which participants categorize personally relevant items (e.g., their own surnames) as probes together with categorically similar but irrelevant items (e.g., others' surnames) by one key press A, while categorizing self-referring “inducer” items (e.g., “MINE” or “MY NAME”) with an alternative key press B, thereby establishing an association between self-relatedness and B and an incongruence between the self-relatedness of probes and A (Lukács, Gula, Szegedi-Hallgató, & Csifcsák, 2017). The A-CIT's sensitivity to concealed information is reflected in an incongruence effect: slower responses to probes than to other surnames. To increase the relevance of categories, between trials of the original A-CIT, category-to-response mappings switched or repeated unpredictably. This, however, could have diminished incongruence effects, as the response labels were presented in the corners of the display, veering spatial attention away from the items at screen center. In the present online study (n = 294), we therefore tested two improved versions of the A-CIT that do not require spatial attention shifts to and from peripheral labels. One improved version presents per trial only one category label at screen center and requires comparison to the currently presented item. The other improved version is based on the Identification Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (ID-EAST), in which item categorization switches (or repeats) based on colors versus meanings of the central items. Both new versions outperformed the original A-CIT.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Verschuere ◽  
Gáspár Lukács ◽  
Bennett Kleinberg

The reaction time (RT)-based Concealed Information Test (CIT) allows for the detection of concealed knowledge (e.g., one’s true identity) when the questions are presented randomly (multiple-probe protocol), but its performance is much weaker when questions are presented in blocks (e.g., first question about surname, then about birthday; single-probe protocol). The latter test protocol, however, is the preferred and sometimes even the only feasible interviewing method in real-life. In a first, pre-registered, experiment (n = 363), we show that the validity of the single-probe protocol version can be substantially improved by including familiarity-related filler trials (e.g., “KNOWN,” “UNKNOWN”). We replicated these findings in a second, preregistered, experiment (n = 237), where we further found that the use of familiarity-related fillers even improved the classic multiple-probe protocol. We recommend the use of familiarity-related filler trials for the RT-based CIT.


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (8) ◽  
pp. 1388-1402
Author(s):  
Danielle G. Norman ◽  
Daniel A. Gunnell ◽  
Aleksandra J. Mrowiec ◽  
Derrick G. Watson

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 1406-1418
Author(s):  
Dave Koller ◽  
Franziska Hofer ◽  
Tuule Grolig ◽  
Signe Ghelfi ◽  
Bruno Verschuere

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document