Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41102429›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Movement of deception in motion capture.

Shao-Kang Lee, Ken Fujiwara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shao-Kang LeeDepartment of Psychology, National Chung Cheng University, Minghsiung, Taiwan, People's Republic of China. aaronleelsk@gmail.com.
Ken FujiwaraDepartment of Psychology, National Chung Cheng University, Minghsiung, Taiwan, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deception detection has attracted broad interest in professional practice and academic research, and body movement is considered one of the key aspects in deception detection. Previous work has focused on certain body parts (i.e., hand, head, leg) or gestures (i.e., gaze aversion, leg unnatural movement, etc.), which were manually coded by human judges. However, manual coding of nonverbal behavior is time-consuming and painstaking to the coders, as well as possibly vulnerable to observation biases. To overcome the challenges associated with manual coding, we employed a motion capture system to collect the body movements, in which a total of 80 participants were engaged in two interviews about their holiday experiences. In interviews about their vacation experiences, participants either told the whole truth or lied completely. The results revealed distinct movement patterns across conditions. Lower body movement differentiated honest from deceptive responses, and this association was moderated by task order, whereas upper body movement showed no reliable effects once task order was taken into account. Notably, the pattern does not support a generalized "rigidity effect" (i.e., uniformly reduced movement during deception); instead, the observed movement differences were order-dependent. Exploratory analyses using machine learning approaches further delineated the temporal dynamics of deceptive movement, providing complementary insights into nonverbal markers of deception.

Indexed as

DeceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleMotionMotion CaptureMovementYoung AdultDeceptionDeception detectionMotion captureNonverbal behaviorThe rigidity effect

Identifiers

PMID41102429
PMCPMC12532807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.