ArticleScientific reports2018
Covert lie detection using keyboard dynamics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unanticipated questions can yield unanticipated outcomes in investigative interviews.PloS one · 2018Trial
- Movement of deception in motion capture.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Examining embedded lies through computational text analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Detecting lies in investigative interviews through the analysis of response latencies and error rates to unexpected questions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Verbal lie detection using Large Language Models.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Building a second-opinion tool for classical polygraph.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The detection of faked identity using unexpected questions and choice reaction times.Psychological research · 2021Article
- Assessing the impact of previous experience on lie effects through a transfer paradigm.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Sharing the Space With the "Victim" Can Increase Help Rates. A Study With Virtual Reality.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Knowledge of Depression and Malingering: An Exploratory Investigation.Europe's journal of psychology · 2020Article
- Machine Learning in Psychometrics and Psychological Research.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Introducing Machine Learning to Detect Personality Faking-Good in a Male Sample: A New Model Based on Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form Scales and Reaction Times.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- The Detection of Malingering: A New Tool to Identify Made-Up Depression.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
- False Identity Detection Using Complex Sentences.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identifying the true identity of a subject in the absence of external verification criteria (documents, DNA, fingerprints, etc.) is an unresolved issue. Here, we report an experiment on the verification of fake identities, identified by means of their specific keystroke dynamics as analysed in their written response using a computer keyboard. Results indicate that keystroke analysis can distinguish liars from truth tellers with a high degree of accuracy - around 95% - thanks to the use of unexpected questions that efficiently facilitate the emergence of deception clues.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.