1. Deliberate Deception and Changes in Vocal Frequencies
Anna Marie Mainiero & Joshua Halonen, Ph.D
Dept. of Psychology at the University of Tampa; Tampa, FL 33606
INTRODUCTION
Lie detection classically is associated with polygraph measures. Other techniques that have been used to detect deception include the fMRI and EEG scans. Linguistics related to lying have also been studied including response times (Williams, Bott, Patrick, & Lewis, 2013) , variety in statements (Armistead, 2012), pronoun usage (Von Swol & Braun, 2014), word count (Schelleman-Offermans & Merckelbach, 2010), and laryngeal microtremors through voice stress evaluators (Hollien, Gelson, & Hicks, 1987). What if there’s a more passive and reliable way to decipher whether a person is being deceitful through linguistics? Our research aims to provide a possible alternative to lie detection through changes in vocal frequencies.
STATISTICS
A one-tailed repeated measure t-test found a significant difference in GSR between lies and truths, with t (49) = 2.993, p =
A one-tailed repeated measure t-test found a significant difference in frequency fluctuations between lies and truths, with t (49) = 5.544, p <
RESULTS
Lies
Truths
Lies resulted in significantly more change in GSR than truthful responses
Lies resulted in significantly more fluctuations in pitch than truthful responses
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
These results show that even when instructed to lie, people can not stop physiological changes from occurring that indicate deceit.
Furthermore, there are more pitch changes in the spoken word when lying.
These results suggest that monitoring changes in frequencies during speech could be a reliable passive method to detect lies
METHODS
A total of 50 students from the University of Tampa participated. After consent, a brief survey of yes and no responses was collected. Prior to each appointment, the experimenter organized each survey and marked which questions for each participant will be answered honestly or deceitfully, providing about 2 of each condition: honest :”yes”, honest “no”, deceitful “yes”, and deceitful “no”. During testing physiological monitor leads from an iWorx TA-220 (Dover, NH) to detect heart rate, respiration, body temperature, and GSR were attached. The experimenter sat next to the participant for the duration of the experiment. Initial baseline physiological recordings lasted approximately 2 minutes. During this time the experimenter had the participant say yes 5 times and no 5 times to acquire baseline speech patterns. the experimenter asked the same questions, from the brief survey. Before each question the experimenter instructed the participant to deliberately provide an untruthful or truthful answer. After completing the series of questions the participant was detached from all monitors and debriefed. * *
EXAMPLE SURVEY QUESTIONS
1.) Do you live in a dormitory?
2.) Do you like broccoli?
3.) Do you have a cat?
4.) Are you a senior?
REFERENCES
Armistead, T. W. (2012). The detection of deception by linguistic means. Policing, 35(2), doi:
Hollien, H., Geison, L., and Hicks, J., "Voice Stress Evaluators and Lie Detection," Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1987, pp ,  ISSN
Schelleman-Offermans, K., & Merckelbach, H. (2010). Fantasy proneness as a confounder of verbal lie detection tools. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 7(3),
Van Swol, L.,M., & Braun, M. T. (2014). Communicating deception: Differences in language use, justifications, and questions for lies, omissions, and truths. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(6), doi:
Williams, E. J., Bott, L. A., Patrick, J., & Lewis, M. B. (2013). Telling lies: The irrepressible truth? PLoS One, 8(4) doi: