{"id":14219,"date":"2022-08-30T13:21:03","date_gmt":"2022-08-30T17:21:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jasonapollovoss.com\/web\/?p=14219"},"modified":"2025-09-05T14:05:00","modified_gmt":"2025-09-05T20:05:00","slug":"key-scientific-paper-redux-accuracy-of-deception-judgments","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jasonapollovoss.com\/web\/2022\/08\/30\/key-scientific-paper-redux-accuracy-of-deception-judgments\/","title":{"rendered":"Key Scientific Paper Redux \u2013 Accuracy of Deception Judgments"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”]<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

At Deception And Truth Analysis (D.A.T.A.) we are first and foremost, grounded in the findings of deception science. Globally there are just a handful of researchers working in this space. Here we are talking about endowed professorships, or researchers whose sole emphasis is on these subjects. Deception science touches on multiple fields including social psychology, criminal justice, natural language processing, and more generally, computer science.<\/span><\/p>\n

At D.A.T.A. we also realize that few professionals truly enjoying scientific papers. Thus, our commitment is to provide summaries of key research in deception science to better educate our Clients, enthusiasts, and those interested in lying behavior. We call this series: Key Scientific Paper Redux.<\/span><\/p>\n

First up in this series is the preeminent classic work of deception science \u201cAccuracy of Deception Judgments<\/a>\u201d by Charles F. Bond, Jr. and Bella M. DePaulo (2006). This paper is a meta-analysis that demonstrates people\u2019s accuracy in surfacing deception and is among the most referenced paper in all of deception science.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

What is a Meta-Analysis?<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

A meta-analysis is essentially a study of studies that uses statistical techniques to combine the results of many separate studies into an overarching study. Why is this important? It is important because individual studies can be dismissed as anomalies, or because the effect sizes reported may be small. By combining studies into a larger study of studies it allows for more sweeping conclusions. At D.A.T.A. meta-analyses allow us to confidently assert things such as: using body language cues to uncover deception is unreliable.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

Accuracy of Deception Judgments: Study Details<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

Bond and DePaulo synthesized research results from 206 deception judgment studies, covering the deception detection abilities of 24,483 people. The first of these studies was published in 1941 and the latest was published in 2005, the year of their meta-analysis. In the studies people attempted to discriminate between deception and truth with no special aids or training.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

Accuracy of Deception Judgments: Major Findings<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. People\u2019s overall accuracy in deception-truth judgments = 54.45%.<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. The highest reported accuracy is 73% and the lowest is 31%.<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Using statistical techniques, the true standard deviation across studies = 4.52%.<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Proper classification of lies as deceptive = 47%.<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. Proper classification of truths as non-deceptive = 61%.<\/span><\/li>\n
  6. Cohen\u2019s\u00a0d<\/em>\u00a0(a measure of the size of the effect, i.e. people\u2019s deception detection abilities) = 0.40, or a medium-sized effect in the typical way of interpreting this measure.<\/span><\/li>\n
  7. Rates of deception detection vary little from study to study.<\/span><\/li>\n
  8. People judge other people\u2019s deceptions more harshly than their own.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    <\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

    Accuracy of Deception Judgments: Sub-Findings<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

    Deception Medium<\/u>: In the real world, detecting deception takes place in different mediums. For three different contexts here is the \u201ccorrect lie-truth classification\u201d accuracy:<\/span><\/p>\n