Abstract

BackgroundWhile the Concealed Information Test (CIT) can determine whether examinees recognize critical details, it does not clarify the origin of the memory. Hence, when unknowledgeable suspects are contaminated with crime information through media channels or investigative interviews, the validity of the CIT can be compromised (i.e. false-positive outcomes). Yet, when the information was disclosed solely at the category level (e.g. the perpetrator escaped in a car), presenting specific items at the exemplar level (e.g. Citroën, Opel, or Volkswagen) might preclude this problem. However, diminished recollection for exemplar-level details could attenuate the CIT effect for knowledgeable suspects, thereby leading to false negatives. The appropriate item level for memory detection to reach an optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity remains elusive. As encoding, retention, and retrieval of information may influence memory performance and thereby memory detection, the current study investigated the validity of the CIT on both categorical and exemplar levels.ResultsParticipants planned a mock robbery (n = 165), with information encoded at the category (e.g. car) or exemplar (e.g. Citroën) level. They were tested immediately or after a one-week-delay, with a response time-based CIT consisting of questions at the categorical or exemplar level. An interaction was found between encoding and testing, such that CIT validity based on reaction time was higher for “matching” (e.g. exemplar-exemplar) than for “mismatching” (e.g. exemplar-categorical) items, while immediate versus one week delayed testing did not affect the outcome.ConclusionCritically, this indicates that what constitutes a good CIT item depends on the way the information was encoded. This provides a challenge for CIT examiners when selecting appropriate items.

Highlights

  • David Lykken introduced the Guilty Knowledge Test – nowadays known as the Concealed Information Test (CIT; Verschuere, Ben-Shakhar, & Meijer, 2011) – in 1959

  • The purpose of memory detection is to verify whether suspects are aware of critical information related to a crime by measuring psychophysiological or behavioral responses

  • The method requires that the examiner determines a number of established facts from the investigation to create a multiple-choice like test with several questions, for instance probing whether the murder weapon was a bomb, a firearm, or a knife

Read more

Summary

Introduction

David Lykken introduced the Guilty Knowledge Test – nowadays known as the Concealed Information Test (CIT; Verschuere, Ben-Shakhar, & Meijer, 2011) – in 1959 The purpose of this alternative to traditional polygraph testing is to verify whether suspects show physiological or behavioral responses signaling recognition of. The examiner creates a CIT in which, similar to a multiple-choice test with several answering options, critical information is probed while measuring the suspects’ response to all presented stimuli. In this specific case, the examiner might draft a question regarding the getaway vehicle, such as “How did the perpetrator flee from the scene? Retention, and retrieval of information may influence memory performance and thereby memory detection, the current study investigated the validity of the CIT on both categorical and exemplar levels

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call