| Title |
On Lie Detection “Wizards”
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Law and Human Behavior, January 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10979-006-9016-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charles F. Bond, Ahmet Uysal |
| Abstract |
M. O'Sullivan and P. Ekman (2004) claim to have discovered 29 wizards of deception detection. The present commentary offers a statistical critique of the evidence for this claim. Analyses reveal that chance can explain results that the authors attribute to wizardry. Thus, by the usual statistical logic of psychological research, O'Sullivan and Ekman's claims about wizardry are gratuitous. Even so, there may be individuals whose wizardry remains to be uncovered. Thus, the commentary outlines forms of evidence that are (and are not) capable of diagnosing lie detection wizardry. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Slovakia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 21% |
| Unknown | 12 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 71 | 60% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2023.
All research outputs
#946,595
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Law and Human Behavior
#54
of 1,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,166
of 168,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Law and Human Behavior
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 168,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.