Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability
The aims of the present study were to analyse people’s natural ability to discriminate between true and false statements provided by people with intellectual disability (IQTRUE = 62.00, SD = 10.07; IQFALSE = 58.41, SD = 8.42), and the differentiating characteristics of such people’s statements using...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid
2018-12-01
|
| Series: | Anuario de Psicología Jurídica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
https://journals.copmadrid.org/apj/archivos/articulo20190128134907.pdf
|
| _version_ | 1818996215584391168 |
|---|---|
| author | Antonio L. Manzanero M. Teresa Scott Rocío Vallet Javier Aróztegui Ray Bull |
| author_facet | Antonio L. Manzanero M. Teresa Scott Rocío Vallet Javier Aróztegui Ray Bull |
| author_sort | Antonio L. Manzanero |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The aims of the present study were to analyse people’s natural ability to discriminate between true and false statements provided by people with intellectual disability (IQTRUE = 62.00, SD = 10.07; IQFALSE = 58.41, SD = 8.42), and the differentiating characteristics of such people’s statements using criteria-based content analysis (CBCA). Thirty-three people assessed 16 true statements and 13 false statements using their normal abilities. Two other evaluators trained in CBCA evaluated the same statements. The natural evaluators differentiated between true and false statements with somewhat above-chance accuracy, even though error rate was high (38.19%). That lay participants could not effectively discriminate between false and true statements demonstrates that such assessments cannot be considered useful in a forensic context. The CBCA technique did discriminate at a better level than intuitive judgements. However, of the 19 criteria, only one significantly discriminated. More procedures specifically adapted to the abilities of people with intellectual disabilities are thus required. The presence of structured production, quantity of details, characteristics details and unexpected complications increased the probability that a statement would be considered true by non-expert evaluators. The classification made by the non-expert evaluators was independent of the participants’ IQ. A big data analysis is performed in search for better classification quality. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T21:26:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8b103b4fc71746aea152d3d79ac79404 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1133-0740 2174-0542 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T21:26:12Z |
| publishDate | 2018-12-01 |
| publisher | Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Anuario de Psicología Jurídica |
| spelling | doaj.art-8b103b4fc71746aea152d3d79ac794042022-12-21T19:26:09ZengColegio Oficial de Psicólogos de MadridAnuario de Psicología Jurídica1133-07402174-05422018-12-012915510.5093/apj2019a111320559Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual DisabilityAntonio L. Manzanero0M. Teresa Scott1Rocío Vallet2Javier Aróztegui3Ray Bull4Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, SpainUniversidad del Desarrollo, Chile, Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile;Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, SpainUniversidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, SpainDerby University, United Kingdom, Derby University, United KingdomThe aims of the present study were to analyse people’s natural ability to discriminate between true and false statements provided by people with intellectual disability (IQTRUE = 62.00, SD = 10.07; IQFALSE = 58.41, SD = 8.42), and the differentiating characteristics of such people’s statements using criteria-based content analysis (CBCA). Thirty-three people assessed 16 true statements and 13 false statements using their normal abilities. Two other evaluators trained in CBCA evaluated the same statements. The natural evaluators differentiated between true and false statements with somewhat above-chance accuracy, even though error rate was high (38.19%). That lay participants could not effectively discriminate between false and true statements demonstrates that such assessments cannot be considered useful in a forensic context. The CBCA technique did discriminate at a better level than intuitive judgements. However, of the 19 criteria, only one significantly discriminated. More procedures specifically adapted to the abilities of people with intellectual disabilities are thus required. The presence of structured production, quantity of details, characteristics details and unexpected complications increased the probability that a statement would be considered true by non-expert evaluators. The classification made by the non-expert evaluators was independent of the participants’ IQ. A big data analysis is performed in search for better classification quality. https://journals.copmadrid.org/apj/archivos/articulo20190128134907.pdf Credibility assessmentIntuitive judgmentsIntellectual disabilityCBCA Content criteriaBig data |
| spellingShingle | Antonio L. Manzanero M. Teresa Scott Rocío Vallet Javier Aróztegui Ray Bull Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability Anuario de Psicología Jurídica Credibility assessment Intuitive judgments Intellectual disability CBCA Content criteria Big data |
| title | Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability |
| title_full | Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability |
| title_fullStr | Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability |
| title_full_unstemmed | Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability |
| title_short | Criteria-based Content Analysis in True and Simulated Victims with Intellectual Disability |
| title_sort | criteria based content analysis in true and simulated victims with intellectual disability |
| topic | Credibility assessment Intuitive judgments Intellectual disability CBCA Content criteria Big data |
| url |
https://journals.copmadrid.org/apj/archivos/articulo20190128134907.pdf
|
| work_keys_str_mv | AT antoniolmanzanero criteriabasedcontentanalysisintrueandsimulatedvictimswithintellectualdisability AT mteresascott criteriabasedcontentanalysisintrueandsimulatedvictimswithintellectualdisability AT rociovallet criteriabasedcontentanalysisintrueandsimulatedvictimswithintellectualdisability AT javieraroztegui criteriabasedcontentanalysisintrueandsimulatedvictimswithintellectualdisability AT raybull criteriabasedcontentanalysisintrueandsimulatedvictimswithintellectualdisability |