Truth or lie: ability of listeners to detect deceptive emergency calls of missing children

ABSTRACT Background: Emergency calls may help law enforcement determine the proper response and provide investigative leads. Time may be wasted and appropriate resources misallocated if callers provide untruthful information. However, human ability to detect deception is generally weak. Objectives: We compared the abilities of law enforcement officers and non-law enforcement staff abilities to correctly identify truthful or deceptive emergency calls reporting missing children using Grice's maxims of communication (quantity, manner, relation, and quality of information). Method: Forty participants listened to 32 emergency calls reporting a missing child. Sixteen callers truthfully reported not knowing the child's whereabouts, and sixteen were responsible for killing the child before falsely reporting the child missing. Participants rated the quantity (insufficient, appropriate, excessive), manner (clear/orderly, unclear/disorderly), relation (relevant, irrelevant), and quality (truthful, deceptive) of information. Participants also provided a written narrative of their impressions of the call. Results: Accuracy in identifying truthful and deceptive callers was consistent with prior research, with sworn law enforcement slightly outperforming non-sworn staff. Participant agreement on Grice's maxims was poor. Ratings of quantity, manner, and relation of information predicted judgments of call quality, but were not associated with accurately identifying calls. Participant narratives describing reasons for judging a call to be truthful or deceptive were also not associated with accurate identification. Conclusions: Our findings do not support the use of Grice's maxims for determining deception in emergency calls. Although law enforcement officers outperformed non-sworn staff, both groups showed inconsistent rationales to support veracity judgments and relied on cues not associated with accuracy.