The validity study about criteria of reality monitoring

본 연구의 목적은 진술분석 기법 중 현실 모니터링 기법을 이용하여 진술자들이 작성한 진술서의 진실 정도를 판단하는 과정에서, 어떤 진술문이 더 진실에 가까운지를 수사관들이 비교적 손쉽게 판단할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 현실모니터링기법의 준거들이 진술문의 진실여부를 판단하는 데 타당성이 있는지를 살펴보는 데 있다. 이를 위해 실제 사건과 유사하다고 판단되는 비디오집단과 상상집단으로 집단을 구분하여 비디오 집단에게는 5분 분량의 범죄사건을 묘사한 비디오영상을 시청하게 하였고, 상상 집단에게는 인물, 행위, 배경 등의 상황을 중심으로 비디오 내용과 최대한 유사하게 구성한 내용문을 읽어주어 상상하도록 지시하였다. 일주일 후에, 참가자들에 의해 회상보고된 진술서를 Sporer(1997)가 개발한 현실모니터링의 8가지 준거들 중 7개의 준거들을 기준으로 하여 각 준거에 해당하는 문장의 빈도를 고려한 비율로 채점하였다. 이를 로지스틱회귀분석으로 분석한 결과, 비디오 집단으로 구분한 정확률은 73.6%, 상상집단으로 구분한 정확률은 84.8%로, 전반적으로 79.2%가 정확하게 판단되었다. 이상의 연구결과로 미루어볼 때, 현실모니터링 기법에서 사용되는 Sporer의 준거들은 진술서의 진실여부를 판단하는 데에 상당한 타당성을 지닌다고 볼 수 있다. 마지막으로 본 연구의 몇 가지 제한점을 언급했다.

keywords: Statement Analysis, Reality Monitoring, Authenticity of Statement, Criteria, Statement Analysis, Reality Monitoring, Authenticity of Statement, Criteria, 진술분석, 현실모니터링, 진실여부 판단, 평가준거

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine the applicability of the Reality Monitoring method in judging the authenticity of statements. Compared to other statement analysis methods, the Reality Monitoring method is relatively an easy way for investigators to judge which statement is closer to the truth in the process of judging the authenticity of written statements. For this purpose, participants were divided into Imaginary Group and Video Group. Video Group was regarded similar to a real case. Video Group were told to reminisce after watching a 5-minute crime case, and Imaginary Group were imagine to do so after listening to the case. Later, statements of the participants were analyzed based on the standards of the Reality Monitoring method. And the data were analyzed with Logistic Regression. The result showed that the accuracy rate of classifying the participants into Video Group was 73.6%, and the accuracy rate of classifying the participants into Imaginary Group was 84.8%. The overall accuracy rate was 79.2%. The results of this research show that the Reality Monitoring method is helpful in judging the authenticity of written statements.

keywords: Statement Analysis, Reality Monitoring, Authenticity of Statement, Criteria, Statement Analysis, Reality Monitoring, Authenticity of Statement, Criteria, 진술분석, 현실모니터링, 진실여부 판단, 평가준거

참고문헌

김미영 (2005). 효율적인 수사면담을 위한 단축형 인지면담 개발. 경기대학교 석사학위논문.

김미영 (2007). 진술분석. 한국범죄및수사심리학회창립학술발표대회논문집, 85-100.

김성룡 (2006). 형사절차상 신문방법과 진술의 왜곡가능성에 대한 소고. 법학논고, 25, 93-113.

김종률 (2002). 수사심리학. 학지사.

이미선 (2005). 진술분석. 대검찰청 과학수사포럼, 23-43.

이은진, 이수정 (1999). 증인의 기억 왜곡에서의 무관련 정보 효과. 한국심리학회지, 5(1), 3-14.

정선희 (2006). 현실모니터링 기법에 의한 진술의 진실여부 판단. 경기대학교 석사학위논문.

정선희, 강기영, 김미영, 전충현, 김시업 (2006). 범죄장면의 회상에 있어서 현실 모니터링 준거에서의 차이.한국심리학회 연차학술대회 발표논문집, 392-393.

Adams, S. H. (1996). Statement Analysis; What Do Sus- pect's Words Really Reveal? FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin.

10.

Adams, S. H. (2002). Communication under stress: Indi- cators of veracity and deception in written narratives. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

11.

Alonso-Quencuty, M. L. (1992). Deception detection and reality monitoring: a new answer to an old question? In F. Lösel, D. Bender, and T. Bliesener(Eds.), Psychology and Law: International Perspectives (328-332). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

12.

Gene Klopf, M. A., & Tooke, A. (2003). Statement Analysis Field Examination Technique: A Useful Investigation Tool. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 6-15.

13.

Gödert, H. W., Gamer, M., Rill, H. G., & Vossel, G. (2005). Statement validity assessment: Inter-rater reliability of criteria-based content analysis in the mock-crime pardigm. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 225-245.

14.

Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, & Olsson, C. (2001). Fact or fiction? Adult' ability to assess children's veracity. Paper presented at the 11th European Conference on Psychology and law. lisbon, Portugal.

15.

Höfer, E., Akehurst, L., & Metzger, G. (1996). Reality monitoring: a chance for further development of the CBCA? Paper presented at the 6th European Conference on Psychology and Law. Sienna, Italy.

16.

Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85.

17.

Johnson, M. K., Foley, M. A., Suengas, A., & Raye, C. L. (1988). Phenomenal characteristics of memories for perceived and imagined autobiographical events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 371-376.

18.

Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-29.

19.

Masip, J., Sporer. S. L., Garrido, E., & Herrero, C. (2005). The detection of deception with the reality moni- toring approach A review of the empirical evidence. Psychology Crime & Law, 11(1), 99-122.

20.

Santtila, P., Roppola, H., & Niemi, P. (1999). Assessing the truthfulness of witness statements made by children(aged 7/8, 10/11, and 13/14) employing scales derived from Johnson and Raye's model of Reality Monitoring. Expert Evidence, 6, 273-289.

21.

Sapir, A. (1987). Scientific Content Analysis(SCAN). Phoenix, Arizona: Laboratory of Scientific Inter- rogation.

22.

Schooler, J. W., Clark, C. A., & Loftus, E. F. (1988). Knowing when memory is real. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, and R. N. Sykes(Eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues, Vol. 1: Memory in Everyday Life(83-88). Chich- ester: Wiley.

23.

Schooler, J. W., Gerhard, D., & Loftus, E. F. (1986) Qualities of the unreal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 171-181.

24.

Smith, N. (2001). Reading between the lines: An evalua- tion of the Scienific Content Analysis technique (SCAN). Research Development and Statistics Directorate.

25.

Sporer, S. L., & Hamilton, S. C. (1996). Should I believe this? Reality monitoring of invented and self experi- enced events from early and late teenage years. Poster presented at the NATO Advanced Study Institute. Port de Bourgenay, France.

26.

Sporer. S. L. (1997). The less travelled road to truth: Verbal cues in deception detection in accounts of fabricated and self-experienced events. Applied cognitive psychology, 11, 373-397.

27.

Sporer. S. L. (2004). Reality monitoring and detection of deception. The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts. Cambridge University Press, 64-102.

28.

Steller, M., & Khnken, G. (1989). Criteria-based statement analysis. In D. C. Raskin(Ed.), Psychological Methods in Criminal Investigation and Evidence(217-45). New York: Springer.

29.

Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2003). How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 9, 9-36.

30.

Strömwall, L. A., Bengtsson, L., Leander L., & Granhag, P. A. (2004). Assessing Children's Statements: The Impact of a Repeated Experience on CBCA and RM ratings. Applied Congnive Psychology, 18, 653-668.

31.

Taylor, L. (1984). Scientific interrogation, 104. The Michie Company.

32.

Undeutsch, U. (1989). The development of statement reality analysis. In J. C. Yuille(Ed.), Credibility Assessment(101-119). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

33.

Vrij, A. (2000). The psychology of lying and the impli- cations for professional practice. Detecting lies and deceit. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 157-165.

34.

Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., & Bull, R. (2004). Detecting deceit via analyses of verbal and nonverbal behavior in children and adults. Human Communi- cation Research, 30(1), 8-41.

바로가기메뉴

논문 상세

Vol.21 No.3

현실모니터링 준거에 대한 타당성 연구 - Sporer의 준거를 중심으로 -

The validity study about criteria of reality monitoring

초록

Abstract

참고문헌

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격