Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms

Irena Boskovic; Claudia Tejada Gallardo; Aldert Vrij; Lorraine Hope; Harald Merckelbach

doi:10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272

Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms

Irena Boskovic^*, Claudia Tejada Gallardo, Aldert Vrij, Lorraine Hope, Harald Merckelbach

^*Corresponding author for this work

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

Abstract

Several studies on the verifiability approach found that truth-tellers report more verifiable details than liars. Therefore, we wanted to test whether such a difference would emerge in the context of malingered symptoms. We obtained statements from undergraduates (N = 53) who had been allocated to three different conditions: truth-tellers, coached malingerers and naive malingerers. Truth-tellers carried out an intensive physical exercise and after a short interval wrote a report about their experience and elicited symptoms. The two malingering groups had to fabricate a story about the physical activity and its symptoms. Truth-tellers did not generate more verifiable details than malingerers. However, malingerers reported more non-verifiable details than truth-tellers. Coached and naive malingerers did not differ in this respect. Relative to truth-tellers, naive malingerers reported more symptoms-related non-verifiable details, while coached malingerers reported more exercise-related non-verifiable details. Focusing on non-verifiable details may inform the detection of malingered symptoms.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	65-76
Number of pages	12
Journal	Psychiatry Psychology and Law
Volume	26
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272
Publication status	Published - 2019

Keywords

deception detection
malingering
symptoms
verifiability approach
LIARS STRATEGIES
TRUTH

Access to Document

10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms
Boskovic, I. (Contributor), Tejada Gallardo, C. (Contributor), Vrij, A. (Creator), Hope, L. (Contributor) & Merckelbach, H. (Contributor), DataverseNL, 2 Oct 2019
DOI: 10.34894/ymnbua, https://doi.org/10.34894%2Fymnbua
Dataset/Software: Dataset

Cite this

@article{53300fed863443ecafa5eb49460d3094,

title = "Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms",

abstract = "Several studies on the verifiability approach found that truth-tellers report more verifiable details than liars. Therefore, we wanted to test whether such a difference would emerge in the context of malingered symptoms. We obtained statements from undergraduates (N = 53) who had been allocated to three different conditions: truth-tellers, coached malingerers and naive malingerers. Truth-tellers carried out an intensive physical exercise and after a short interval wrote a report about their experience and elicited symptoms. The two malingering groups had to fabricate a story about the physical activity and its symptoms. Truth-tellers did not generate more verifiable details than malingerers. However, malingerers reported more non-verifiable details than truth-tellers. Coached and naive malingerers did not differ in this respect. Relative to truth-tellers, naive malingerers reported more symptoms-related non-verifiable details, while coached malingerers reported more exercise-related non-verifiable details. Focusing on non-verifiable details may inform the detection of malingered symptoms.",

keywords = "deception detection, malingering, symptoms, verifiability approach, LIARS STRATEGIES, TRUTH",

author = "Irena Boskovic and Gallardo, {Claudia Tejada} and Aldert Vrij and Lorraine Hope and Harald Merckelbach",

note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by the House of Legal Psychology/Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate [Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036]; [Cohort 2015 with Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 2015-1610]. Funding Information: This work was supported by the House of Legal Psychology/Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate [Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036]; [Cohort 2015 with Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 2015-1610]. The study was carried out under the House of Legal Psychology, the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate programme. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018, {\textcopyright} 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.",

year = "2019",

doi = "10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272",

language = "English",

volume = "26",

pages = "65--76",

journal = "Psychiatry Psychology and Law",

issn = "1321-8719",

publisher = "Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Verifiability on the run

T2 - an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms

AU - Boskovic, Irena

AU - Gallardo, Claudia Tejada

AU - Vrij, Aldert

AU - Hope, Lorraine

AU - Merckelbach, Harald

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by the House of Legal Psychology/Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate [Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036]; [Cohort 2015 with Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 2015-1610]. Funding Information: This work was supported by the House of Legal Psychology/Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate [Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036]; [Cohort 2015 with Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 2015-1610]. The study was carried out under the House of Legal Psychology, the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate programme. Publisher Copyright: © 2018, © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Several studies on the verifiability approach found that truth-tellers report more verifiable details than liars. Therefore, we wanted to test whether such a difference would emerge in the context of malingered symptoms. We obtained statements from undergraduates (N = 53) who had been allocated to three different conditions: truth-tellers, coached malingerers and naive malingerers. Truth-tellers carried out an intensive physical exercise and after a short interval wrote a report about their experience and elicited symptoms. The two malingering groups had to fabricate a story about the physical activity and its symptoms. Truth-tellers did not generate more verifiable details than malingerers. However, malingerers reported more non-verifiable details than truth-tellers. Coached and naive malingerers did not differ in this respect. Relative to truth-tellers, naive malingerers reported more symptoms-related non-verifiable details, while coached malingerers reported more exercise-related non-verifiable details. Focusing on non-verifiable details may inform the detection of malingered symptoms.

AB - Several studies on the verifiability approach found that truth-tellers report more verifiable details than liars. Therefore, we wanted to test whether such a difference would emerge in the context of malingered symptoms. We obtained statements from undergraduates (N = 53) who had been allocated to three different conditions: truth-tellers, coached malingerers and naive malingerers. Truth-tellers carried out an intensive physical exercise and after a short interval wrote a report about their experience and elicited symptoms. The two malingering groups had to fabricate a story about the physical activity and its symptoms. Truth-tellers did not generate more verifiable details than malingerers. However, malingerers reported more non-verifiable details than truth-tellers. Coached and naive malingerers did not differ in this respect. Relative to truth-tellers, naive malingerers reported more symptoms-related non-verifiable details, while coached malingerers reported more exercise-related non-verifiable details. Focusing on non-verifiable details may inform the detection of malingered symptoms.

KW - deception detection

KW - malingering

KW - symptoms

KW - verifiability approach

KW - LIARS STRATEGIES

KW - TRUTH

U2 - 10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272

DO - 10.1080/13218719.2018.1483272

M3 - Article

C2 - 31984064

SN - 1321-8719

VL - 26

SP - 65

EP - 76

JO - Psychiatry Psychology and Law

JF - Psychiatry Psychology and Law

IS - 1

ER -

Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Datasets

Verifiability on the run: an experimental study on the verifiability approach to malingered symptoms

Cite this