The current threat of global terrorism has sparked a renewed interest in the development of more effective methods for the detection of deception. In the United States, the American Psychological Association (APA)—spurred by torture allegations involving terrorist suspects—established guidelines for professional practice regarding investigative methods that could be conceptualized as coercive. As affirmed by APA, psychological research can play an active and ethical role in the development of standardized methods for the detection of deception. Instead of focusing on external sources of terrorism, this conceptual paper argues for programmatic research on insider threats, specifically risks to national security posed by government and other employees. In briefly reviewing deception research, recent investigations of cognitive loads and deceptions hold particular promise, especially studies that systematically manipulate levels of cognitive load. These methods can be extended to collateral sources, further minimizing ethical concerns while broadening the scope of deception investigation.
AikensD. E.MartinD. J., & MorganC. A. (2010). Decreased respiratory sinus arrhythmia in individuals with deceptive intent. Psychophysiology, 47, 633–636.
2.
American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical standards and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57(12), 1060–1073.
3.
American Psychological Association (2005). Report of the Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/pens.pdf
4.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct: 2010 amendments. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
5.
BandS. R.CappelliD. M.FischerL. F.MooreA. P.ShawE. D. (2006). Comparing insider IT sabotage and espionage: A model-based analysis. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from www.cert.org/archive/pdf/06tr026.pdf
6.
BarnierA. J.SharmanS. J.McKayL., & SporerS. L. (2005). Discriminating adults' genuine, imagined, and deceptive accounts of negative and positive childhood accounts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 985–1001.
7.
BarrickM.ShafferJ., & DeGrassiS. (2009). What you see may not be what you get: Relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1394–1411.
8.
BehnkeS. (2006). Psychological ethics and national security: The position of the American Psychological Association. European Psychologist, 11, 153–155.
9.
BerryC. M.SackettP. R., & WiemannS. (2007). A review of recent developments in integrity test research. Personnel Psychology, 60, 271–301.
10.
BuxS. M., & CoyneS. M. (2009). The effects of terrorism: The aftermath of the London terror attacks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 2936–2966.
11.
Canadian Psychological Association (2000). Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists (3rd ed.). Ottawa, Canada: Author.
12.
CarneyR. M. (1996). SSBI source yield: An examination of sources contacted during the SSBI. Monterey, CA: Defense Personnel Security Research Center.
13.
CarterL. A., & AbelesN. (2009). Ethics, prisoner interrogation, national security, and the media. Psychological Services, 6, 11–21.
14.
CasoL.GnisciA.VrijA., & MannS. (2005). Processes underlying deception: An empirical analysis of truth and lies when manipulating the stakes. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 2, 195–202.
15.
ClavelleP. (2009). Consulting to the intelligence community: An employee assistance program model. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61(1), 14–24.
16.
CohenD. H. (2010). Post-9/11 anti-terrorism policy regarding non-citizens and the constitutional idea of equal protection under the laws. Texas Law Review, 88, 1323–1343.
17.
Department of Defense Personnel Security Research Center (1998). Adjudicative desk reference (ADR). Monterey, CA: Department of Defense Personnel Security Research Center.
18.
Department of Defense Personnel Security Research Center (2007). Adjudicative desk reference (ADR) (Version 3.1). Monterey, CA: Department of Defense Personnel Security Research Center. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/ADR/ADR/index.htm
DevanJ. L. (2004). A taxometric analysis of impression management and self-deception on the MMPI-2 among law enforcement applicants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pacific Graduate School of Psychology.
21.
DiMaggioC.GaleaS., & LiG. (2009). Substance use and misuse in the aftermath of terrorism: A Bayesian meta-analysis. Addiction, 104, 894–904.
22.
Ethics Resource Center. (2007). National government ethics survey: An inside view of public sector ethics. Arlington, VA: Author.
Global Deception Research Team. (2006). A world of lies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37, 60–74.
25.
GombosV. (2008). Cognitive load and deception: The role of executive processes in the production of deceptive attitude statements. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 69(1-B), 709.
26.
GreeneC. H., & BanksL. M. (2009). Ethical guideline evolution in psychological support to interrogation operations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61, 25–32.
27.
GrubinD., & MadsenL. (2005). Lie detection and the polygraph: A historical review. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 16, 357–369.
28.
HendersonN. C. (2002). The Patriot Act's impact on the government's ability to conduct electronic surveillance of ongoing domestic communications. Duke Law Journal, 5, 179–209.
29.
HerbigK. L. (2008). Changes in espionage by Americans: 1947–2007. Monterey, CA: Defense Personnel Security Research Center. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr08-05.pdf
30.
HurtzG., & AlligerG. (2002). Influence of coaching on integrity test performance and unlikely virtues scale scores. Human Performance, 15(3), 255–273.
31.
IaconoW. G. (2008). Effective policing: Understanding how polygraph tests work and are used. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(10), 1295–1308.
32.
JohnsonR. J., & HobfollS. E. (2010). Mental health and terrorism. In ScheidT. L. & BrownT. N. (Eds.), A handbook for the study of mental health: Social contexts, theories, and systems (2nd ed., pp. 384–405). New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
KalayjianA.MusgraveB., & AbersonC. (2010). Psychosocial and spiritual impact of terrorism on mental health professionals in America. In KalayjianA. & EugeneD. (Eds.), Mass trauma and emotional healing around the world: Rituals and practices for resilience and meaning-making (pp. 327–342). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
34.
KidaneW. (2010). The terrorism bar to asylum in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: Transporting best practices. Fordham International Law Journal, 22, 300–371.
KramerL. A.CrawfordK. S.HeuerR. J.Jr., & HagenR. R. (2001). SSBI-PR source yield: An examination of sources contacted during the SSBI-PR. Monterey, CA: Defense Personnel Security Research Center. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr01-05.pdf
37.
KuckesN. (2006). Civil due process, criminal due process. Yale Law and Policy Review, 25, 1–61.
38.
KulkofskyS. (2008). Credible but inaccurate: Can Criterion-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) distinguish true and false memories? In SmithM. J. (Ed.), Child sexual abuse: Issues and challenges (pp. 21–42). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
39.
LangE. L. (2005). Security background investigations and clearance procedures of the federal government. Monterey, CA: Defense Personnel Security Research Center. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/mr05-05.pdf
40.
LealS., & VrijA. (2008). Blinking during and after lying. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 187–194.
41.
LealS.VrijA.MannS.A., & FisherR.P. (in press). Detecting concealed information about person detection. Applied Cognitive Psychology.
42.
LeeJ. E.GibsonS.MarkonM. L., & LemyreL. (2009). A preventive coping perspective of individual response to terrorism in Canada. Current Psychology, 28, 69–84.
43.
LeeK.AshtonM.MorrisonD.CorderyJ., & DunlopP. (2008). Predicting integrity with the HEXACO personality model: Use of selfand observer reports. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 147–167.
44.
LenzerT.KaczmirekL., & LenznerA. (2010). Cognitive burden of survey questions and response times: A psycholinguistic experiment. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1003–1020.
45.
MalleB.KnobeJ., & NelsonS. (2007). Actor-observer asymmetries in explanations of behavior: New answers to an old question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 491–514.
46.
MannS., & VrijA. (2006). Police officers' judgments of veracity, tenseness, cognitive load, and attempted behavioral control in real-life police interviews. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12, 307–319.
47.
MasipJ.SporerS.GarridoE., & HerreroC. (2005). The detection of deception with the reality monitoring approach: A review of the empirical evidence. Psychology, Crime & Law, 11, 99–122.
48.
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976).
49.
MillerG. R., & StiffJ. B. (1993). Deceptive communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
50.
PaulhusD. L. (1998). Paulhus Deception Scales. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
51.
PorterS., & ten BrinkeL. (2008). Reading between the lies: Identifying concealed and falsified emotions in universal facial expressions. Psychological Science, 19, 508–514.
52.
ReillyW., & JoyalP. (1993). Project SLAMMER: A critical look at the Director of Central Intelligence Directive No. 1/14 criteria. Washington, DC: Director of Central Intelligence.
53.
RogersR. (2008). An introduction to response styles. In RogersR. (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 3–13). New York: Guilford Press.
54.
SackettP. R.BurrisL. R., & CallahanC. (1989). Integrity testing for personnel selection: An update. Personnel Psychology, 42, 491–529.
55.
SackettP. R., & WanekJ. E. (1996). New developments in the use of measures of honesty, integrity, conscientiousness, dependability, trustworthiness, and reliability for personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 49, 787–829.
56.
ScriminS.MoscardinoU.CapelloF.AltoeG., & AxiaG. (2009). Recognition of facial expressions of mixed emotions in school-age children exposed to terrorism. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1341–1352.
57.
SporerS., & SchwandtB. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 421–446.
58.
SporerS., & SchwandtB. (2007). Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13, 1–34.
59.
SteinbrookR. (1992). The polygraph test: A flawed diagnostic method. The New England Journal of Medicine, 327, 122–123.
60.
TehranianJ. (2009). The last minstrel show? Racial profiling, the war on terrorism and the mass media. Connecticut Law Review, 41, 781–824.
61.
UndeutschU. (1982). Statement reality analysis. In TrankellA. (Ed.), Reconsidering the past: The role of psychologists in criminal trials (pp. 27–56). Deventer, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
62.
U.S. v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987).
63.
U.S. General Accounting Office (1995). Background investigations: Impediments to consolidating investigations and adjudicative functions. Washington, DC: Author.
USA Patriot Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–56, 115 Stat. 272 (2001).
66.
VrijA. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and its implications for professional practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
67.
VrijA. (2005). Criterion-based content analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 3–41.
68.
VrijA. (2008a). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
69.
VrijA. (2008b). Nonverbal dominance versus verbal accuracy in lie detection: A plea to change police practice. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 1323–1336.
70.
VrijA.FisherR.MannS., & LealS. (2006). Detecting deception by manipulating cognitive load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 141–142.
71.
VrijA.FisherR.MannS., & LealS. (2010). Lie detection: Pitfalls and opportunities. In LassiterG. D. & MeissnerC. A. (Eds.), Police interrogations and false confessions: Current research, practice, and policy recommendations (pp. 97–110). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
72.
VrijA.LealS.MannS.A., & GranhagP.A. (in press). A comparison between lying about intentions and past activities: Verbal cues and detection accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology.
73.
VrijA.MannS.FisherR.LealS.MilneR., & BullR. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 253–265.
74.
VrijA.MannS.LealS., & FisherR. (2010). Look into my eyes: Can instruction to maintain eye contact facilitate lie detection?Psychology, Crime, and Law, 4, 327–348.
75.
WalczykJ.MahoneyK.DoverspikeD., & Griffith-RossD. (2009). Cognitive lie detection: Response time and consistency of answers as cues to deception. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 33–49.
76.
WestbrookA. D. (2010). What's in your portfolio? U.S. investors are unknowingly financing state sponsors of terrorism. DePaul Law Review, 59, 1151–1221.
77.
WoodS.CrawfordK. S., & LangE. L. (2005). Reporting of counterintelligence and security indicators by supervisors and coworkers. Monterey, CA: Defense Personnel Security Research Center. Retrieved July 1, 2011, from http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/reports/tr05-6.pdf.
78.
ZuckermanM.DePauloB. M., & RosenthalR. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: Vol. 14 (pp. 1–57). New York: Academic Press.
