Fading lies: applying the verifiability approach after a period of delay

Louise Marie Jupe, Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Galit Nahari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


We tested the utility of applying the Verifiability Approach (VA) to witness statements after a period of delay. The delay factor is important to consider because interviewees are often not interviewed directly after witnessing an event. A total of 64 liars partook in a mock crime and then lied about it during an interview, seven days later. Truth tellers (n = 78) partook in activities of their own choosing and told the truth about it during their interview, seven days later. All participants were split into three groups, which provided three different verbal instructions relating to the interviewer’s aim to assess the statements for the inclusion of verifiable information: no information protocol (IP) (n = 43), the standard-IP (n = 46) and an enhanced-IP (n = 53). In addition to the standard VA approach of analysing verifiable details, we further examined verifiable witness information and verifiable digital information and made a distinction between verifiable details and verifiable sources. We found that truth tellers reported more verifiable digital details and sources than liars.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)327-342
Number of pages16
JournalPsychology, Crime and Law
Issue number4
StatePublished - 20 Apr 2020


  • Deception
  • delay
  • investigative interviews
  • verifiability approach

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Law
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • General Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Fading lies: applying the verifiability approach after a period of delay'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this