바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.24 No.2

Citation Share

The Validity of the Scientific Content Analysis(SCAN)-Based on the Accuracy of Detecting the Areas of Deception in Statements

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2010, v.24 no.2, pp.203-220
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.2.012


& (2010). The Validity of the Scientific Content Analysis(SCAN)-Based on the Accuracy of Detecting the Areas of Deception in Statements. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 24(2), 203-220, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2010.24.2.012

Abstract

Scientific Content Analysis(SCAN) is a technique to detecting deceptive areas in a written statements. This study was to explore the validity of the SCAN criteria detecting deceptive areas in a korean-written statements. The participants were 145 students, were divided into two groups: offender group VS victim group. Both groups were asked to write true statements about the incidents, then to make out untrue statements later about the same incidents. 92 statements written by 46 participants were analyzed. As a result, the SCAN criteria detected accurately(61%) deceptive areas in the untrue statements, and the numbers of the SCAN's specific criteria were significantly more in the untrue statements than in the true ones, no matter whether they were written by the offenders or victims. Besides, the amount of words in the untrue statement was significantly less than true statement. The implications and limitations of this study and challenges for future research were discussed.

keywords
scientific content analysis, validity, SCAN criteria, 과학적 내용분석, 타당성, SCAN 준거

Reference

1.

윤여훈(2008). 아동들의 가해·피해 진술에 대한 준거기반 내용분석의 타당성 연구. 강원대 석사 논문.

2.

이수정(2009). 아동 대상 성범죄 조사절차의 미비점 및 개선방안 연구: 진술타당성분석(Statement Validity Analysis)의 형사사법적 활용가능성. 한국경찰연구, 8(2), 3-30.

3.

이미선(2005). 성폭력 피해 아동 진술에 대한 준거기반 내용분석(Criteria-Based Content Analysis)의 타당화를 위한 연구. 한림대 석사 논문.

4.

이재웅(2007). 목격자 진술에 대한 SCAN(Scientific Content Analysis) 기법의 타당도 연구. 한림대 석사 논문.

5.

최혜림, 이수정(2009). 성폭력 피해 진술에 대한 신빙성분석도구의 문항 반응 특성 분석. 한국심리학회지 :여성, 14(4), 591-616.

6.

홍성열(2007). 진술분석기법의 타당성 연구. 2007년 대검찰청 용역 연구과제.

7.

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

8.

Adams, S. H. & Javis, J. P. (2006). Indicators of veracity and deception: An analysis of written statements made to police. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(1).1-22.

9.

Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa : Nominal sale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement and partical credit, Psychological Bullentin, 70, 213-220.

10.

Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1993). The suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403-439.

11.

Driscoll, L. N. (1994). A Validity assessment of written statements from suspects in criminal investigations using the scan technique. Police Studies Vol. XVII. no. 4, 77-88.

12.

Esplin, P. W., Boychuk T., & Raskin D. C. (1988). A filed validity study of criteria-based content analysis of children's statements in sexual abuse case. Paper presented at The NATO Advanced Study Institute on credibility assessment in Maaratea, Italu, June 1988.

13.

Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. (2nd Ed). New York : Hohn Wiley & Sons.

14.

Lamb, M. E., Sternberg K. J., Esplin P. W., Jershkowitz I., Orbach Y., & Hovav M. (1997). Criteria-based content analysis: A filed validation study. Child Abuse and Neglect, 21, 255-264.

15.

Lesce (1990). SCAN: Deception detection by scientific content analysis. Law and Order, 38(8). 3-4.

16.

Lynn, S., T. (2001). Linguistic foundations of investigative discourse analysis and content-based criteria analysis. Cornell University Ph.D.

17.

McClish, M. (2001). I know you are lying. Winterville, NC : The Marpa Group.

18.

Nathan, J. G. & William L. F. (2006). Effective interviewing & interrogation techniques. Burlington, MA : Elsevier.

19.

Ornstein, P. A., Merritt, K. A., Baker-Ward, L., Futado, E., Gordon, B. N., & Principe, G. F. (1998). Children's knowledge, expectation, and long-term retention. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 378-405.

20.

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

21.

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

22.

Steller, M. & Kohnken, G. (1989). Criteria-based content analysis. In D. C. Raskin(ed.), Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence (pp. 217-45). New York, NJ:Springer.

23.

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

24.

Vicki lee(2007). The language of deception. 덕성여 자대학교, 인문과학연구. 11, 1-28.

25.

Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The Psychology of lying and its implications for professional practice, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.

26.

Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities, Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.

27.

Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., & Bull, R. (2002). Will the truth come out? The effect of deception, age, status, coaching, and social skills on CBCA scores. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 261-283.

28.

Zapariniuk, J., Yuille, J. C., & Taylor, S (1995). Assessing the credibility of true and false statements. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 18(3), 343-352.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy