NCJ Number
243547
Journal
Legal and Criminological Psychology Volume: 17 Issue: 2 Dated: September 2012 Pages: 322-335
Date Published
September 2013
Length
14 pages
Annotation
This study examined the accuracy of observers in discriminating genuine and fabricated sexual assault allegations.
Abstract
Assessing the credibility of reports of sexual victimization - often in the absence of corroboration - presents a significant challenge for legal decisionmakers. This study examined the accuracy of observers in discriminating genuine and fabricated sexual assault allegations. Further, the study examined whether individual differences and cue utilization strategies influenced deception detection accuracy. Observers (N= 119) evaluated 8 (4 truthful and 4 deceptive) written allegations of sexual assault (counterbalanced), and completed a Credibility Assessment Questionnaire (CAQ) and individual differences measures. Results indicated that overall accuracy was below chance (M= 45.3 percent), and a truth bias was evidenced. Examining the Big Five personality traits, the authors found that openness to experience and neuroticism were positively associated with accuracy, whereas extraversion was negatively related to accuracy. Further, judgment confidence was negatively associated with accuracy. The present study offers insights into observers' perceptions of credibility regarding real-life sexual assault allegations. Implications for legal decisionmaking are discussed. Abstract published by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons.