Deciding whether or not a witness’s statement is credible or a deceptive is a difficult task. Often investigators need to elicit more detailed statements from interviewees in order to find potential leads, while simultaneously forming a decision of whether they think the person is lying or not. Researchers have proposed that the Model Statement is an effective tool that can do just that, and one that is allegedly used in practice by both the police and intelligence officials. Based upon a critical analysis of the Model Statement literature, we argue that this tool is not currently ready to for practical usage, as its utility has not been established. We highlight a diverse range of existing Model Statement scripts, and an even bigger diversity in the measures used with this tool. We also highlight why some of the current measures are not fit for practice, and suggest that any new research should use the well-established Reality Monitoring criteria. Recommendation are that more research is needed to investigate how the Model Statement functions, and what drives information elicitation, and deception detection. A more robust replication of existing Model Statements is also needed
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
StateSubmitted - 11 Feb 2020

    Research areas

  • deception, model statement

ID: 3394795