請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15514
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 趙儀珊(Yee-San Teoh) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yu-Wen Wang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 王郁雯 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-07T17:41:28Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2020-07-20 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-07-13 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 石宜琳(2007):《測謊於刑事司法審判上之運用--兼論測謊於證據法上之評價》 (未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北大學,台北市。 吳政峰(2019年2月20日)。測謊不得當證據? 司法院今召開公聽會激辯。「自由時報」。取自https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/society/breakingnews/2704131 翁景惠、高一書(2003):〈測謊在我國法院使用之實證研究〉。《臺大法學論叢》, 32,149-207。 黃金蘭、林以正、謝亦泰、程威銓(2012):〈中文版 [語文探索與字詞計算] 詞典之建立〉。《中華心理學刊》, 54(2),185-201.。 Aamodt, M. G., Custer, H. (2006). Who can best catch a liar?. Forensic Examiner, 15(1), 6-11. Alonso‐Quecuty, M. L. (1992). Deception detection and reality monitoring:A new answer to an old question? In F. Lösel, D. Bender, T. Bliesener(Eds.), Psychology and law: International perspectives (pp. 328–332). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter. Arciuli, J., Mallard, D., Villar, G. (2010). “Um, I can tell you’re lying”: Linguistic markers of deception versus truth-telling in speech. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 397–411. doi:10.1017/S0142716410000044 Bell, B. E., Loftus, E. F. (1989). Trivial persuasion in the courtroom: The power of (a few) minor details. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 669. Bond Jr, C. F., DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 214-234. Buller, D. B., Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6(3), 203-242. Cody, M. J., Marston, P. J., Foster, M. (1984). Deception: Paralinguistic and verbal Leakage, . Annals of the International Communication Association, 8(1), 464-490. doi:10.1080/23808985.1984.11678586 Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Leal, S., Verigin, B. L., Kleinman, S. M. (2020). When and how are lies told? And the role of culture and intentions in intelligence‐gathering interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 1-21 DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Laura Muhlenbruck, K. C., Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–118. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74 DePaulo, B. M., Rosenthal, R. (1979). Telling lies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1713-1722. Frank, M. G., Ekman, P. (2004). Appearing truthful generalizes across different deception situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 486–495. Fiedler, K., Schmid, J., Stahl, T. (2002). What is the current truth about polygraph lie detection? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24(4), 313–324. doi:10.1207/S15324834BASP2404_6 Global Deception Research Team. (2006). A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(1), 60-74. Gnisci, A., Caso, L., Vrij, A. (2010). Have you made up your story? The effect of suspicion and liars' strategies on reality monitoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(6), 762-773. Gronau, N., Ben-Shakhar, G., Cohen, A. (2005). Behavioral and physiological measures in the detection of concealed information. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 147-158. Hauch, V., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Masip, J., Sporer, S. L. (2015). Are computers effective lie detectors? A Meta-Analysis of linguistic cues to deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(4), 307–342. Hauch, V., Sporer, S. L., Masip, J., Blandón-Gitlin, I. (2017). Can credibility criteria be assessed reliably? A Meta-Analysis of Criteria-Based Content Analysis. Psychological Assessment, 29(6), 819-834. Hauch, V., Sporer, S. L., Michael, S. W., Meissner, C. A. (2016). Does training improve the detection of deception? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 43(3), 283-343. Heering, N., Volbert, R. (2017). The individual depictive style: Individual differences in narrating personal experiences. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31, 216–224. doi:10.1002/acp.3319 Hwang, H. C., Matsumoto, D., Sandoval, V. (2016). Linguistic cues of deception across multiple language groups in a mock crime context. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 13(1), 56-69. Iacono, W. G. J. P., Behavior. (2008). Accuracy of polygraph techniques: Problems using confessions to determine ground truth. Physiology Behavior, 95(1-2), 24-26. Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88(1), 67-85. Kassin, S. M., Meissner, C. A., Norwick, R. J. (2005). “I’d Know a False Confession if I Saw One”: A comparative study of college students and police investigators. Law and Human Behavior, 29(2), 211–227. doi:10.1007/s10979-005-2416-9 Knapp, M. L., Hart, R. P., Dennis, H. S. (1974). An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 1(1), 15-29. Kircher, J. C., Horowitz, S. W., Raskin, D. C. (1988). Meta-analysis of mock crime studies of the control question polygraph technique. Law and Human Behavior, 12(1), 79-90. Köhnken, G., Steller, M. (1988). The evaluation of the credibility of child witness statements in the German procedural system. Issues in Criminological Legal Psychology, 13, 37-45. Koper, R. J., Sahlman, J. M. (1991). The behavioral correlates of real-world odeceptive communication. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association. Chicago: ICA. Kuiken, D. (1981). Nonimmediate language style and inconsistency between private and expressed evaluations. . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17(2), 183-196. Leins, D. A., Fisher, R. P., Ross, S. J. (2013). Exploring liars’ strategies for creating deceptive reports. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18(1), 141-151. Liberman, N., Trope, Y. (2014). Traversing psychological distance. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 364-369. Ma, W.-Y., Chen, K.-J. (2003). 'Introduction to CKIP Chinese Word Segmentation System for the First International Chinese Word Segmentation Bakeoff', . Proceedings of ACL, Second SIGHAN Workshop on Chinese Language Processing, 168-171. Masip, J., Ces, C. (2011, March). Guilty and innocent suspects’ self-reported strategies during an imagined police interview. In 4th International Congress on Psychology and Law, Hyatt Regency Hotel, Miami, Florida, USA, March (pp. 3-5). Matsumoto, D., Hwang, H. C., Sandoval, V. A. (2015). Cross-language applicability of linguistic features associated with veracity and deception. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 30(4), 229-241. Nahari, G. (2018). The applicability of the verifiability approach to the real world. In Detecting concealed information and deception (pp. 329-349). Academic Press. Nahari, G., Vrij, A., Fisher, R. P. (2014). The verifiability approach: Countermeasures facilitate its ability to discriminate between truths and lies. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(1), 122-128. Nahari, G., Vrij, A., Fisher, R. P. (2012). Does the truth come out in the writing? Scan as a lie detection tool. Law and Human Behavior, 36(1), 68-76. Newman, M. L., Pennebaker, J. W., Berry, D. S., Richards, J. M. (2003 ). Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 665-675. Oberlader, V. A., Naefgen, C., Koppehele-Gossel, J., Quinten, L., Banse, R., Schmidt, A. F. (2016). Validity of content-based techniques to distinguish true and fabricated statements: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 40(4), 440-457. Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin. Porter, S., ten Brinke, L. (2010). The truth about lies: What works in detecting high‐stakes deception?. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 15(1), 57-75. Reinhard, M. A., Sporer, S. L., Scharmach, M., Marksteiner, T. (2011). Listening, not watching: Situational familiarity and the ability to detect deception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 467-484. Roberts, K. (2012). Police interviewing of criminal suspects: a historical perspective. Internet Journal of Criminology,5, 1-17. Roediger III, H. L. (1996). Memory illusions. Journal of Memory and Language, 35(2), 76-100. Sporer, S.L. (2004). Reality monitoring and detection of deception. In P.A. Granhag, L.A. Stro¨mwall (Eds.), Deception detection in forensic contexts (pp. 64–102). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Sporer, S. L., Schwandt, B. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta‐analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 20(4), 421-446. Steller, M., Köhnken, G. (1989). Statement analysis: Credibility assessment of children’s testimonies in sexual abuse cases. Psychological Methods in Criminal Investigation and Evidence, 217-245. Strömwall, L. A., Willén, R. M. (2011). Inside criminal minds: Offenders' strategies when lying. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8(3), 271-281. Vrij, A. (2016). Baselining as a lie detection method. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(6), 1112-1119. Vrij, A. ( 2015 ). Verbal lie detection tools: Statement validity analysis, reality monitoring and scientific content analysis. . In P. A. Granhag, Vrij, A., Verschuere, B. (Ed.), Detecting Deception: Current Challenges and Cognitive Approaches. (pp. 3-35 New ). York, NY: John Wiley Sons. Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., Bull, R. (2002). Will the truth come out? The effect of deception, age, status, coaching, and social skills on CBCA scores. Law and Human Behavior, 26(3), 261-283. Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., Bull, R. ( 2004). Let me inform you how to tell a convincing story: CBCA and reality monitoring scores as a function of age, coaching, and deception. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science , 36(2), 113. Vrij, A., Fisher, R., Mann, S., Leal, S. (2008). A cognitive load approach to lie detection. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 5(1‐2), 39-43. Vrij, A., Fisher, R., Mann, S., Leal, S. (2006). Detecting deception by manipulating cognitive load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 141-142. Vrij, A., Leal, S., Fisher, R. P. (2018). Verbal deception and the model statement as a lie detection tool. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 492. Vrij, A., Leal, S., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Hillman, J., Sperry, K. (2009). Outsmarting the liars: The benefit of asking unanticipated questions. Law and Human Behavior, 33(2), 159-166. Vrij, A., Mann, S. A., Fisher, R. P., Leal, S., Milne, R., Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. . Law and Human Behavior, 32(3), 253-265. Wiener, M., Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal And Nonverbal Communication Of Deception. Advances In Expenmental Social Psychology, 14, 1-59. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15514 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 儘管有許多測謊言語指標的相關研究,但大多研究並沒有排除每個人的說話風格。而少數分析同一人說謊與說實話的研究,皆為意見表達,而非能推論到司法實務應用的模擬犯罪實驗。因此本研究讓參與者經歷兩個模擬犯罪事件以找出可以用來測謊的言語指標。我們也進一步探討了不同策略如何影響測謊言語指標的可用性。另外,我們額外分析了訪談順序對測謊指標可用性的影響。本研究分析了53位台大學生的謊言和實話中十個由認知負荷理論、接近性理論及現實監測理論推得的詞類出現之頻率差異。發現有五個詞類可作為測謊指標:填充贅詞、第一人稱單數代名詞、第三人稱單數代名詞、空間詞、時間詞。本研究發現參與者是否使用非言語策略、仿真策略及訪談順序會影響可用指標。而是否使用言語策略則不會影響測謊指標。這可能是因為使用不同策略,對認知資源有不同影響。本研究提供一個可類推到高張情境使用的測謊言語指標,且分析了在參與者使用不同策略及在不同時間點說謊對指標的可用性的影響,司法實務工作者可在適合情境下使用這些指標測謊。文末討論了本文限制與未來相關研究可以如何改進。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Despite the many studies about verbal cues to deception in recent years, very few of them successfully addressed the severe confounding variable, communicational style. Even if they did, these studies used paradigms that participants merely falsely and truthfully express their opinions rather than experiences. Therefore, the current study investigated the differences between lies and truths from the same participants by the frequencies of ten theory-based word categories. To ensure our results can be applied in high-stake contexts, we made our participants experience two mock crimes and then being investigated. In light to present studies, we investigated the effect of lying strategies on the frequencies of word categories. We also explored how the lie position affect the verbal cues to deception. 53 participants were included in this study. 5 categories demonstrated significant differences between truths and lies: Filler words, first and three personal pronouns, space words and time words. Further, the effectiveness of some word categories varied regarding to whether participants applying noverbal, approach the truth strategies and the lie position. However, results remained the same regardless of using verbal strategies or not. This may due to different demands of cognitive resources when using different strategies and lying in different accounts. The results provide a reliable approach that may enhance individuals’ lie-detecting ability in high-stake scenarios. Most importantly, they may apply suitable cues depend on different contexts. Some limitations and suggestions to future studies were also discussed. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-07T17:41:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-1107202014425200.pdf: 1724585 bytes, checksum: 41df513838605ee93950a96104dd111e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景 1 第二節 文獻回顧 1 第三節 本研究 10 第二章 研究方法 13 第一節 參與者 13 第二節 實驗設計 14 第三節 研究材料 14 第四節 研究流程 15 第五節 資料分析 17 第三章 結果 21 第一節 操弄檢核 21 第二節 說謊與說實話的詞類差異 23 第三節 有無使用策略及言語指標 23 第四節 訪談順序 32 第四章 綜合討論 36 第一節 主要發現 36 第二節 本研究的限制 40 第三節 本研究的貢獻 41 第四節 結語 44 參考文獻 45 附錄 53 附錄一:「事件參與」進行方式及指導語 53 附錄二:事件使用材料 55 附錄三:「訪談階段」的訪談大綱 60 附錄四:準備後問卷 62 附錄五:準備後問卷 63 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 不同策略及訪談順序下的測謊言語指標的適用性 | zh_TW |
dc.title | How Strategies and Lie Position Affect the Effectiveness of Verbal Cues To Deception | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃金蘭(Chin-Lan Huang),李佳霖(Chia-Lin Lee) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 言語指標,測謊,模擬犯罪,策略, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | verbal cues,lie detection,mock crime,strategies, | en |
dc.relation.page | 63 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202001441 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2020-07-13 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 心理學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 心理學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-1107202014425200.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.68 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。