바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.24 No.2
Citation Share

Empirical Validation of SCAN(Scientific Content Analysis) with Experimentally Derived Eyewitness Statements

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2010, v.24 no.2, pp.151-167
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.2.009


& (2010). Empirical Validation of SCAN(Scientific Content Analysis) with Experimentally Derived Eyewitness Statements. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 24(2), 151-167, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.2.009
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

SCAN(Scientific Content Analysis) is one of the most popular statement analysis techniques being used by investigators in many countries. SCAN analyzes the content and structure of statements of suspects, victims, or witnesses and evaluates their credibility. The principles of SCAN are incorporated into several criteria. The presence of each criterion is assumed to be an indication of deception and is more likely to be observed in deceptive statements rather than truthful ones. This study attempts to test the validity of SCAN in analyzing witness statements written in Korean language. Three experimental groups were manipulated. Truthful group saw a real car theft video clip and truthfully wrote about what they actually saw. False group 1 saw the same car theft video clip but intentionally described the theft scene incorrectly. False group 2, saw a non-criminal neutral video clip and wrote as if they saw a car theft crime. Two raters scored SCAN total for each subject's statement applying Smith's(2001) 13 SCAN criteria. The results showed significant differences in SCAN total scores between the truthful group and false groups, in which two false groups obtained significantly higher SCAN scores than the truthful group and there were no differences between the two false groups. Four of 13 criteria significantly differentiated between the truthful and false groups. The results of this study showed that SCAN could be applied to witness statements written in Korean language although the statements were experimentally derived. But some limitations of the current study are discussed and directions for future research are suggested.

keywords
SCAN, 과학적 내용분석, 진술분석, 거짓말 탐지, 목격자 진술, Scientific Content Analysis, SCAN, statement analysis, credibility ssessment, witness credibility, lie detection

Reference

1.

정선희, 강기영, 김시업 (2007). 현실모니터링 준거에 대한 타당성 연구 - Sporer의 준거를 중심으로. 한국심리학회지 사회 및 성격 21, 75-87.

2.

조은경 (2004). 성폭력 피해 아동의 진술 타당도 분석 및 활용 방안에 관한 연구. 한국형사정책연구원 연구총서 04-47.

3.

탁진국 (1996). 심리검사 개발과 평가방법의 이해 서울: 학지사.

4.

Adams, S. (1996). Statement analysis: What do suspects' words really reveal? FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. October, 12-20.

5.

Adams, S. (2004). Are you telling me the truth? Indicators of veracity in written statements. FBI law enforcement bulletin, October. 7-12.

6.

Deffenbacher, K. A. (1980). Eyewitness accuracy and confidence: Can we infer anything about their relationship? Law and Human Behavior, 4, 243-260.

7.

Driscoll, L. N. (1994). A validity assessment of written statements from suspects in criminal investigations using the Scan technique. Police Studies, 17(4), 77-88.

8.

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

9.

Klopf, G., & Tooke, A. (2003). Statement analysis field examination technique: A useful investigation tool. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 6-15.

10.

Lesce, T. (1990). SCAN: Deception detection by Scientific Content Analysis. Law and Order. 38(8), 3-4.

11.

Raskin, D. C., & Yuille, J. C. (1989). Problems in evaluating interviews of children in sexual abuse cases. In S. J. Ceci, M. P. Toglia, & D. F. Ross (Eds.), New perspectives on the child witness (pp. 184-207). New York: Springer-Verlag.

12.

Raskin, D. C., & Esplin, P. W. (1991). Statement validity assessment: Interview procedures and content analysis of children's statements of sexual abuse. Behavior Assessment, 13, 265-291.

13.

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

14.

Sapir, A. (1991). Scientific Content Analysis course presentation. March, 1992. Detroit: Michigan.

15.

Sapir, A. (2000). The L.S.I. Course on scientific content analysis: Workshop book. Phoenix, Arizona: Laboratory of Scientific Interrogation.

16.

Smith, N. (2001). Reading between the lines: An evaluation of the scientific content analysis technique(SCAN). Police Research 135.

17.

Steller, M. (1989). Developments in Statement analysis. Paper presented at the NATO Advanced Study Institute on credibility assessment in Maratea, Italy, June 1988.

18.

Steller, M., & Koehnken G. (1989). Criteria-based content analysis. In D.C. Raskin (Ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence. New York: Springer-Verlag.

19.

Undeutsch, U. (1989). The development of statement reality analysis. Paper presented at the NATO Advanced Study Institute on credibility assessment in Maratea, Italy, June 1988.

20.

Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and the implications for professional practice. Chichester: Wiley.

21.

Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-based content analysis. A qualitative review of the first 37 studies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 3-41.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy