scispace - formally typeset
R

Ray Bull

Researcher at University of Derby

Publications -  266
Citations -  10979

Ray Bull is an academic researcher from University of Derby. The author has contributed to research in topics: Interview & Cognitive interview. The author has an hindex of 55, co-authored 255 publications receiving 10278 citations. Previous affiliations of Ray Bull include John Wiley & Sons & City of Glasgow College.

Papers
More filters
Book

Investigative Interviewing: Psychology and Practice

Becky Milne, +1 more
TL;DR: In this article, a concise and clearly written guide to the psychological concepts and research-based knowledge that can support and guide investigative interviewing is provided, dealing in particular with good basic practice and methods for investigative interviewing how to deal with false confessions and unreliable or incomplete witness information.
Journal ArticleDOI

Detecting Deceit via Analysis of Verbal and Nonverbal Behavior

TL;DR: This article examined the hypotheses that nonverbal behavior could be useful in the detection of deceit and that lie detection would be most accurate if both verbal and nonverbal indicators of deception are taken into account.
Journal ArticleDOI

Increasing Cognitive Load to Facilitate Lie Detection: The Benefit of Recalling an Event in Reverse Order

TL;DR: The hypotheses that the difference between liars and truth tellers will be greater when interviewees report their stories in reverse order than in chronological order are tested and instructing interviewees to recall their stories to facilitate detecting deception are tested.
Journal ArticleDOI

The cognitive interview: A meta-analysis

TL;DR: In this paper, a meta-analysis was performed on the effects of cognitive interviews on correct and incorrect recall, and it was found that the accuracy rates were almost identical in both types of interviews (85% for the cognitive interview and 82% for standard interviews, respectively).
Journal ArticleDOI

Detecting true lies: police officers' ability to detect suspects' lies.

TL;DR: Accuracy and confidence were not significantly correlated, but the level of confidence was dependent on whether officers judged actual truths or actual lies and on the method by which confidence was measured.