Research ALLP

The research project on disclosing evidence in suspect interviews is a substantive attempt to bring research into practice. This effort builds on more than 15 years of research and a collaboration with US local law enforcement. The project is financed by the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Law enforcement officers are rarely trained in how to ethically and effectively use evidence and facts during interviews. This is alarming considering that a suspect’s decision to reveal investigative information is often influenced by the evidence against him or her. The proposed project aims to remedy this by developing and testing a training manual that is based on researched techniques for disclosing evidence in investigative interviews.

In year 1 we will bring together the body of studies on evidence disclosure methods and synthesize this knowledge into a conceptual model of strategic disclosure in investigative interviews. This conceptual model will be translated into an evidence-based training manual that will be validated in a training study. In this study the law enforcement officers will interview mock suspects before being trained in the research-based methods and after having been trained in research-based methods. We will examine the officers’ adherence to the training, the investigative information gathered, and the quality of the relationship with the suspect.

In year 2 we will develop an instructor’s guidebook that will be validated in a ‘train-the-trainer’ study. In this study police instructors will extend the research-based training by independently training their own law enforcement officers. These officers will provide a real suspect interview before they receive the extended research-based training and after they have received the extended research-based training. We will again examine the officers’ adherence to the training, the investigative information gathered, and the quality of the relationship with the suspect.

Project by:

Simon Oleszkiewicz: s.oleszkiewicz@vu.nl

Marika Madfors: m.c.madfors@vu.nl

Annelies Vredeveldt a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

The research project Eyewitness Memory in Cross-Cultural Contexts is a collaborative project of the Amsterdam Laboratory for Legal Psychology (ALLP) and the Center for International Criminal Justice (CICJ). It is financed by an European Research Council Starting Grant awarded to Annelies Vredeveldt.

Our increasingly international society demands that eyewitnesses of serious crimes regularly provide testimony in cross-cultural settings, such as international criminal tribunals. This poses significant challenges for investigators and legal decision-makers. Errors in fact-finding may result in wrongful convictions and unjust acquittals. Yet, eyewitness memory research has predominantly focused on Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) witnesses.n this research project, we assess how culture-dependent variables influence eyewitness memory. The project addresses two key objectives: (1) develop culturally modulated theory of eyewitness memory and (2) design and test evidence-based interview guidelines.

In Subproject 1, we will examine what happens when police investigators interview eyewitnesses from a different cultural background. It will involve the systematic coding of culture-dependent variables in video-recorded police interviews with witnesses of serious crimes in South Africa, a society with many different subcultures. This subproject will be led by postdoctoral research fellow Laura Weiss, supervised by Annelies Vredeveldt.

In Subproject 2, we will analyse the frequency, nature and legal consequences of culture-dependent variables in international criminal cases. It will involve an empirical document analysis of eyewitness evidence provided at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and interviews with international legal scholars and practitioners. This subproject will be led by PhD candidate Dylan Drenk, supervised by Annelies Vredeveldt and Barbora Hola.

In Subproject 3, we will assess how different cultural groups encode, store and retrieve memories, and how memory reports are evaluated in immigration contexts. It will involve a series of experiments in which the objective and perceived characteristics of statements provided by asylum seekers originating from Sub-Saharan Africa are compared to a matched Western control group. This subproject will be led by PhD candidate Gabi de Bruïne, supervised by Annelies Vredeveldt and Peter van Koppen.

The project integrates analyses of video, document and experimental data to provide insight into culture-dependent variables in eyewitness memory. The new theory will enable researchers to steer away from the present WEIRD bias in legal psychology. The interview guidelines will help investigators obtain better information from witnesses.

For more information, download the article on the project published by EU Research here.

Project by:

Annelies Vredeveldt: a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

Peter van Koppen: p.j.van.koppen@vu.nl

Barbora Hola: b.hola@vu.nl

Laura Weiss: l.weiss@vu.nl

Dylan Drenk: d.h.drenk@vu.nl

Gabi de Bruïne: g.de.bruine@vu.nl

The Expert Witnesses project concerns reporting by legal psychological experts in legal cases.  The Netherlands Register of Court Experts (NRGD), a public list of certified experts, has been open to legal psychologists as of May 2017. Peter van Koppen was a member of the NRGD Board at the time and Annelies Vredeveldt was a member of the Advisory Committee for Standards that established the guidelines and registration criteria for expert witnesses in legal psychology. Vredeveldt is also currently a member of the Advisory Committee for Assessments, which evaluates applications for registration as an expert witness in legal psychology.

The creation of a registry for legal psychologists prompted ALLP members to critically reflect on the role of legal psychologists in criminal cases and on what an expert legal psychological report ideally should look like. In February 2017, they organised a meeting for legal psychologists in The Netherlands to discuss reporting guidelines for expert witnesses in our field. This resulted in a publication in the Dutch professional journal Expertise & Recht (Expertise & Law), which has since been translated into English as well.

Together with colleagues and students from Maastricht University, ALLP members and students are currently investigating what legal psychological expert witness reports in The Netherlands and other countries look like and to which extent they are in line with the guidelines set out in the Expertise & Law article. In future research, we hope to investigate experimentally whether learning about the guidelines improves the quality of expert witness reports.

Project by:

Annelies Vredeveldt: a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

Peter van Koppen: p.j.van.koppen@vu.nl

Tess van der Bilt: t.vander.bilt@student.vu.nl

In the research project Validity of Statements, ALLP members examine how we can determine to what extent statements by witnesses, victims and suspect correspond to what really happened.

In his Ph.D. research, André de Zutter, supervised by Robert Horselenberg and Peter van Koppen, examined the validity of rape allegations. He identified a number of crucial variables that could help investigators distinguish between true and false allegations of rape.

Another line of investigation within this project is the role of consistency in statements. Some years ago, Annelies Vredeveldt, Peter van Koppen and Pär Anders Granhag conducted a systematic review in which they identified four different types of consistency: within-statement consistency, between-statement-consistency, within-group consistency and statement-evidence consistency. Their review of the literature showed that most types of consistency do not bear any relation to the truthfulness of the statement.

Project by:

André de Zutter: a.w.e.dezutter@vu.nl

Robert Horselenberg: robert.horselenberg@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Peter van Koppen: p.j.van.koppen@vu.nl

Annelies Vredeveldt: a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

In the research project Eyewitness Collaboration, financed by the Society in Science in Switzerland, Dr. Annelies Vredeveldt and Prof. Peter van Koppen investigate what happens when witnesses remember together.In the eyewitness literature, memory has been portrayed as unreliable and malleable. Further, research on discussion between witnesses has focused almost exclusively on its potential negative consequences, namely that witnesses can contaminate each other’s memory. From a practical perspective, the exclusive focus to date on harmful consequences of co-witness discussion has yielded only one recommendation for investigative interviewers: do not let witnesses talk to each other. This research project aims to shift the focus towards ways in which witnesses may be able to help each other remember more or better. For example, witnesses might help each other remember more, through a memory process known as “cross-cuing”. Moreover, they might correct each other’s errors, through a memory process known as “error pruning”.

Experiments to date show that the addition of a collaborative interview with pairs of witnesses, after initial individual interviews are completed, result in new information that is more accurate than can be obtained with repeated individual interviews. Research is currently underway to test whether these benefits are also observed in a field setting. If the benefits extend to real life, the increase in forensically relevant and accurate information as a result of collaborative eyewitness interviews could help solve criminal cases.

Project by:

Annelies Vredeveldt: a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

Peter van Koppen: p.j.van.koppen@vu.nl

In the Geographical Profiling project, ALLP members investigate how offenders select locations to commit crimes, how they move from and to the crime scene, and which geographical pattern can be observed in offenders’ criminal careers. In his Ph.D. research, Jasper van der Kemp (supervised by Peter van Koppen and Henk Elffers) examined the so-called modus via of crime.

Another research line within this project is research on serial offenders. Jasper van der Kemp is co-founder of the Crime Linkage International Network (C-Link).

Project by:

Jasper van der Kemp: j.j.vander.kemp@vu.nl

Peter van Koppen: p.j.van.koppen@vu.nl

In the research project Bodycams, financed by the Police & Science programme, legal psychologist Dr. Annelies Vredeveldt and criminal law scholar Linda Kesteloo, LL.M. investigate the influence of bodycams on the evidence in criminal cases. They are assisted in this project by researchers Alieke Hildebrandt, Renske van der Steen and Dewi Hollander.

The use of bodyworn cameras (bodycams) for police officers is getting more and more popular in The Netherlands and abroad. The primary reasons for introducing bodycams are to prevent unwanted behaviour by both police officers and civilians, and to increase transparency regarding police actions. A potential side effect could be that wearing a bodycam, or subsequently viewing the bodycam footage, could affect the content of police reports about witnessed incidents.

The aim of this research project is to gain insight into the influence of bodycams, worn by police officers, on the evidence in criminal cases.

Results

The following main findings resulted from the quantitative, qualitative, and legal analysis:

Police reports that were edited after viewing the bodycam footage were more accurate and more complete than the original police reports that were written before watching the bodycam footage. Unexpectedly, no differences in completeness or accuracy were found between the group who wrote their police report before watching the bodycam footage and the group who wrote the report afterwards. One possible explanations may be found in the short timeframe between the incident and writing of the report; reviewing footage might have a bigger impact after some time have passed.

The legal analysis showed that bodycam footage is rarely used as evidence in Dutch criminal cases. Nevertheless, bodycam footage has the potential to play a useful role, for example, in answering the question if the defendant committed the alleged facts, in judging the legality of police officers’ actions, or in checking the content of police reports. An important condition is, however, that any changes made after watching the bodycam footage must be explicitly mentioned, so there is no confusion about the source of the information.

Based on the main findings, three practical recommendations are made to police officers:

1. First write the police report, then view the bodycam footage and edit the report
2. Record what was changed, added or removed
3. If possible, mention the corresponding timestamp on the bodycam footage

These guidelines will facilitate the potential added value of bodycam footage for police investigations and as evidence in criminal cases.

The complete report is available here on the website of Police & Science (only available in Dutch).  An 11-min presentation on the study can be viewed here.

Project by:

Annelies Vredeveldt: a.vredeveldt@vu.nl

Linda Kesteloo: l.kesteloo@vu.nl

Alieke Hildebrandt: a.c.hildebrandt@vu.nl

Renske van der Steen: r.b.vander.steen@vu.nl

Dewi Hollander: d.r.hollander@student.vu.nl

Horselenberg, R., Keijser, J.W. de, Jelicic, M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Over de rechtspsychologie [On legal psychology]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 25-33). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Keijser, J.W. de, Koppen, P.J. van, Horselenberg, R. & Jelicic, M. (2017). Klassieke experimenten in de rechtspsychologie [Classical experiments in legal psychology]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 35-48). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen, P.J. van (2018). De vreemde ontvoering van Roel van Duijn [The weird kidnapping of Roel van Duijn]. Argus, 1(23), 6-8.

Koppen, P.J. van, Keijser, J.W. de, Horselenberg, R. & Jelicic, M. (Eds.). (2017). Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie [Venues of the law: On legal psychology]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Beermann, M., Fransen, J., Korte, S. de, Luisa, Z., Nieuwendijk, S. van den, Ruiter, E., Veenstra, L., Winniczuk, M., Beijers, G., Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). De PlayStation-moorden: Over bewijs van medeplegen [The PlayStation murders: About evidence of complicity]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Boer, M.M. de, Wiznitzer, S.N.P., Evertzen, M.J.C., Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). De gescheurde nagel: Een alternatieve verklaring voor DNA-bewijs [The torn fingernail: An alternative explanation for DNA evidence]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Bruïne, G. de, Boer, A. de, Dehaene, T., Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Een Rwandees kaartenhuis: Een wirwar van wankelende verklaringen [A Rwandan house of cards: A labyrinth of wavering statements]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Crolla, F., Sijsling, H., Ykema, L., Grimberg, M., Ranzijn, N., Zutter, A. de & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). The creative carpenter: Biased presentation of evidence in a jury trial. Den Haag: Eleven.

Crombag, H.F.M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Rechtvaardigheid [Justice]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 809-820). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Dobben, M.L. van, Verkuijlen, F., Jovanović, L., Stokhof, M.R., Borst, L.L.M., Schaik, Y. van, Thiel, M.A.H. van, Willemsen, M., Kemp, J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). De dansende dader: Veelzeggende experimenten [The dancing offender: Telling experiments]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Doorn, J. van, Kunst, M.J.J., Brands, J. & Keijser, J.W. de (2020). De rol van slachtoffercompensatie in de publieke waardering van strafoplegging [The role of victim compensation on the public opinion of sentencing]. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 62(1), 34-47.

Ernst, A., Besselink, L., Hagen, C. van, Kemp, J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). De actievoerder achterna: Over een snelle bekentenis en een late ontkenning [Chasing the activist: On a quick confession and a late denial]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Es, R.M.S. van, Kunst, M.J.J. & Keijser, J.W. de (2020). Forensic mental health expert testimony and judicial decision-making: A systematic literature review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 51, 101387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2020.101387

Keijser, J.W. de, Roberts, J.V. & Ryberg, J. (Eds.) (2019). Predictive sentencing: Normative and empirical perspectives. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Koppen, P.J. van (2017). De tengelhamer en het schedeldak: Over rapportages door het Nederlands Forensisch Instituut [The slater hammer and the cranium: On reports by the Dutch Forensic Institute]. Nederlands Juristenblad, 92, 1444-1452.

Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Hoe onlogisch werken toch logisch kan worden gevonden [How illogical reporting can be called logical]. Nederlands Juristenblad, 92, 2952-2953.

Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Het deskundigenbewijs van de rechtspsycholoog [Expert evidence by the legal psychologist]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 439-459). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Rechterlijke dwalingen [Miscarriages of justice]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 883-916). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen, P.J. van (2017e). Schuld toedelen en boete doen [Distributing guilt and serve penance]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 821-836). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen, P.J. van & Horselenberg, R. (2018). Waarom er in België en Nederland geen rechterlijke dwalingen zijn [Why there are no miscarriages of justice in Belgium and the Netherlands]. Expertise en Recht, 2018, 276-281.

Koppen, P.J. van & Keijser, J.W. de (2017). Invloeden op de rechterlijke beslissing [Influences on legal decisions]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 853-866). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen. P.J. van & Mackor, A.R. (2020). A scenario-approach to the Simonshaven case. Topics in Cognitive Science, 12(4), 1132-1151. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12429 

Mackor, A.R., Jellema, H. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Explanation-based approaches to reasoning about evidence and proof in criminal trials. In: B. Brożek, J. Hage & N.A. Vincent (red.), Law and mind: A survey of law and the cognitive sciences (pp. 431-469). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mackor, A.R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). The scenario theory about evidence in criminal law. In: C. Dahlman, A. Stein & G. Tuzet (red.), Philosophical foundations of evidence law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Maegherman, E., Ask, K., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Test of the analysis of competing hypotheses in legal decision-making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35, 62-70. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3738

Maegherman, E., Ask, K., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Accountability in legal decision-making. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Advanced online publication, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1904452

Maegherman, E.F.L., Boer, M.M. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). De onzichtbare steekpartij: Over strategische selectie van getuigenbewijs [The invisible stabbing: On strategic selection of witness evidence]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Malefason, F. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Vechtpartij na hockeygala: Wirwar van conflicterende getuigenverklaringen over een gebroken kaak [A fight after a hockey gala: A hotchpotch of conflicting witness statements on a broken jaw]. Koud Bloed, 31, 81-93.

Merckelbach, H. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Ethische babbels over de zaak De Ruiter [Ethic prattles on the De Ruiter Case]. De Psycholoog, 51, 23-25.

Nieuwkamp, R., & Robert, L. (2019). Rechterlijke dwalingen, geen onschuldige materie [Miscarriages of justice, no innocent matters]. FATIK, 3, 23-28.

Rijnders, J., Dirksen, L., Splinters, R., Scheepers, J., Beijers, G., Kemp, J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). De Mokumse mokermoord: Bewijsproblemen met camera-opnames [The Amsterdam Sledge Murder: Evidence problems of CCTV recordings]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Stad, D. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Het likkende hondje: Het onderscheid tussen moord en zelfmoord [The licking dog: The difference between murder and suicide]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Teunissen, J., Nietzman, L., Kramer, J.-A., Verstrepen, P., Zwanenburg, M., Nieuwkamp, R., Zutter, A.W.E.A. de & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Het dodelijke dienstwapen: Over bewijs van afvuren [A deadly service gun: On evidence of firing]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Veldhuizen, T.S. van, Maegherman, E., & Horselenberg, R. (2019). Het verhaal gewogen: Kennis van strafrechters over het geheugen en het politieverhoor. Strafblad, 17(4), 58-63.

Vis, J., Akker, K. van den, Hoes, L., Simons, E., Kemp, J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). De dood van een politie-aspirant: Over interpretatie van sporen [The death of a police cadet: On interpretation of forensic traces]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Vredeveldt, A., Hildebrandt. A., Kemp. J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). De thuishulp in het Laakkwartier: Sporen van moord, diefstal of schoonmaak [The housekeeper in Laakkwartier: Traces of murder, theft or cleaning]. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Vredeveldt, A., Otgaar, H.P., Merckelbach, H. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Het rechtspsychologische deskundigenrapport [The legal psychological expert witness report]. Expertise & Recht, 6, 243-247.

Wermink, H.T., Keijser, J.W. de & Schuyt, P.M. (2019). Verdere reflectie op onderzoek naar straftoemeting. Nederlands Juristenblad, 94(10), 675-676.

Anakwah, N., Horselenberg, R., Hope, L., Amankwah-Poku, M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). Cross-cultural differences in eyewitness memory reports. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 504-515. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3637 

Anakwah, N., Horselenberg, R., Hope, L., Amankwah-Poku, M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). The acculturation effect and eyewitness memory reports among sub-Saharan African migrants. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 25, 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12179

Bruïne, G. de, Vredeveldt, A., & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Cross-cultural differences in object recognition: Comparing asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa and a matched Western European control group. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32, 463-473. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3419

Hamlin, I., Taylor, P.J., Cross, L., MacInnes, K., & Zee, S. van der (2020). A psychometric investigation into the structure of deception strategy use. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-020-09380-4 

Horselenberg, R., Boon, R., Odinot, G. & Vredeveldt, A. (2017). Het interviewen van getuigen [Interviewing witnesses]. Hoofdstuk in P. J. van Koppen, J. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Red.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Otgaar, H., Horselenberg, R., Rassin, E., Wessel, I., Jelicic, M., Vredeveldt, A., & Koppen, P.J. van. (2021). De wetenschap achter verdrongen en valse herinneringen. [The science behind repressed and false memories.] De Psycholoog.

Saraiva, R.B, Boeijen, I. van, Hope, L., Horselenberg, R., Sauerland, M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). Development and validation of the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale (EMS). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33, 964-973. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3588

Saraiva, R.B., Boeijen, I. van, Hope, L., Horselenberg, R., Sauerland, M. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). Eyewitness metamemory predicts identification performance in biased and unbiased lineups. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 25, 111-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12166 

Saraiva, R.B., Hope, L., Horselenberg, R., Ost, J., Sauer, J. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020) Using metamemory measures and memory tests to estimate eyewitness free recall performance. Memory, 28, 94-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1688835

Shaw, J., & Vredeveldt, A. (2019). The recovered memory debate continues in Europe: Evidence from the UK, the Netherlands, France, and Germany. Clinical Psychological Science, 7, 27-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026188036

Vredeveldt, A. & Zee, S. van der (2017). De betekenis van consistentie in verklaringen [The meaning of consistency in statements]. Hoofdstuk in P. J. van Koppen, J. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Red.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie. Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). The thin blue line-up: A comparison of eyewitness performance by police and civilians. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5, 252–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.06.013

Vredeveldt, A., Charman, S.D., Blanken, A. den & Hooydonk, M. (2018). Effects of cannabis on eyewitness memory: A field study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32, 420-428. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3414

Vredeveldt, A., Knol, J. W. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Observing offenders: Incident reports by surveillance detectives, uniformed police, and civilians. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12087

Vredeveldt, A., Koppen, P.J. van & Granhag, P.A. (2014). The inconsistent suspect: A systematic review of consistency in truth tellers and liars. In R. H. Bull (Ed.), Investigative interviewing (pp. 183–207). London: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9642-7_10

Zee, S. van der, Poppe, R., Havrileck, A., & Baillon, A. (2021). A personal model of trumpery: Testing linguistic deception detection in a real-world high-stakes setting. Psychological Science, Advance online publication.

Zee, S. van der, Poppe, R.W., Taylor, P.J., & Anderson, R. (2019). To freeze or not to freeze: A culture-sensitive motion-capture approach to detecting deceit. PlosOne, 14(4), e0215000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215000 

Zee, S. van der, Taylor, P.J., Miles, R., Dixon, J., & Menacere, T. (2021). Copycat and a liar: Nonverbal mimicry increases under the cognitive load of lying. Royal Society Open Science, 8(1), 200839. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.200839.  

Zutter, A.W.E.A. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Detecting the true nature of allegations of rape. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32, 114-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-016-9203-z

Zutter, A.W.E.A. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Filing false vice reports: Distinguishing true from false allegations of rape. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 9, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2016.02.002

Zutter, A.W.E.A. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Motives for filing a false allegation of rape. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47, 457-464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0951-3

Zutter, A.W.E.A. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). The prevalence of false allegations of rape in the United States from 2006-2010. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.4172/2475-319X.1000119

Zutter, A.W.E.A. de, Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). A relationship, a venereal disease and its aftermath. II-RP Journal, 8, 59-98.

Adams-Quackenbush, N.M., Horselenberg, R., Hubert, J., Vrij, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). Interview expectancies: Awareness of potential biases influences behaviour in interviewees. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 26, 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1485522

Adams-Quackenbush, N.M.,  Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). Where bias begins: A snapshot of police officers’ beliefs about the investigative interview with suspects. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 34, 373-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-018-9301-1.

Adams-Quackenbush, N.M., Horselenberg, R., Tomas, F. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). Detecting guilt-presumption in a police-suspect interview: An evaluation of the questions in a murder case. Investigative Interviewing: Research and Practice, 10, 37-60.

Adams-Quackenbush, N.M., Horselenberg, R., Vrij, A., Satchell, L.P. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020). Articulating guilt? The influence of guilt presumption on interviewer question phrasing and word abstraction. Current Psychology, Advance online publication, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00726-z 

Brimbal, L., Kleinman, S.M., Oleszkiewicz, S., & Meissner, C.A. (2020). Developing rapport and trust in the interrogative context: An empirically-supported and ethical alternative to customary interrogation practices. In book: Interrogation and torture: Research on efficacy and its integration with morality and legality. Oxford University Press

Brimbal, L., Meissner, C.A., Kleinman, S.M., Phillips, E.L., Atkinson, D.J., Dianiska, R.E., Rothweiler, J.N., Oleszkiewicz, S., & Jones, M.S. (2021). Evaluating the benefits of a rapport-based approach to investigative interviews: A training study with law enforcement investigators. Law and Human Behavior, 45(1), 55-67. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000437

De La Fuente Vilar, A., Horselenberg, R., Strömwall, L.A., Landström, S., Hope, L. & Koppen, P.J. van (2020) Effects of cooperation on information disclosure in mock-witness interviews. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 25, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12167

Granhag, P.A., Oleszkiewicz, S., Sakrisvold, M.L., & Kleinman, S.M. (2019). The Scharff technique: Training military intelligence officers to elicit information from small cells of sources. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 26(5), 438-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2019.1669600

Hope, L., Anakwah, N., Antfolk, J., Brucacher, S.P., Flowe, H., Gabberts, F., Giebels, E., Kanja, W., Korkman, J., Kyo, A., Naka, M., Otgaar, H., Powell, M.B., Selim, H., Skrifvars, J., Kwasi sorkpah, I., Sowatey, E.A., Steele, L.C., Stevens, L., Sumampouw, N.E.J., Taylor, P.J., Trevino-Range;, J., Veldhuizen, T.S. van, Wang, J., Wells, S. (in press). Urgent issues and prospects at the intersection of culture, memory, and witness interviews: Exploring the challenges for research and practice. Legal and Criminological Psychology.

Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Kinderen als getuigen [Interviewing children]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 591-615). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Valse bekentenissen [False confessions]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 687-709). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Verhoren op audio en op video [Interrogations on tape]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 635-641). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Horselenberg, R., Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Nederlandse politieverhoren in de praktijk [Dutch police interviews in practice]. Nederlands Juristenblad, 43, 3185.

Koppen, P.J. van & Horselenberg, R. (2017). Identificatie [Identification]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 283-334). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Koppen, P.J. van & Walhout, F. (2017). Getuigen helpen herkennen: Signalementen, compo’s en vermommingen [Helping witnesses: Offender descriptions, composites and disguishes]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 335-352). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Mergaerts, L., Nieuwkamp, R. & Schellingen, R. (2020). Het verhoren van personen: opportuniteiten in coronatijden [Interviewing people: opportunities in times of corona].

Odinot, G., Rosmalen, E.A.J. van, & Vredeveldt, A. (in press). Eyewitness testimony. In J. M. Brown & M. A. H. Horvath (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oleszkiewicz, S., & Granhag, P.A. (2020). Establishing cooperation and eliciting information: Semi-cooperative sources’ affective resistance and cognitive strategies. In book: Handbook of legal and investigative psychology. Routledge

Oleszkiewicz, S., & Watson, S. J. (2021). A meta-analytics review of the timing for disclosing evidence when interviewing suspects. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(2), 342-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3767

Rantamäki, S., Antfolk, J., Granhag, P.A., Santtila, P., & Oleszkiewicz, S. (2020). Eliciting Intelligence from sources informed about counter-interrogation strategies: An experimental study on the Scharff Technique. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 17(2), 191-211. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1542

Skrifvars, J., Korkman, J., Sui, V., Veldhuizen, T. van, & Antfolk, J. (2020). An analysis of question style and type in official Finnish asylum interview transcripts. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 17(3), 333-348. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1557

Veldhuizen, T.S. van, Horselenberg, R., Landström, S., Granhag, P.A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Interviewing asylum seekers: A vignette study on the questions asked to assess credibility of claims about origin and persecution. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 14, 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1472

Veldhuizen, T.S. van, Horselenberg, R., Stel, M., Landström, S., Granhag, P.A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). The provenance of émigrés: The validity of measuring knowledge of places. Psychology, Crime and Law, 23(6), 553-574. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1284219

Veldhuizen, T.S. van, Maas, R.P.A.E., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Establishing origin: Analysing questions in asylum interviews. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 25, 283-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2017.1376607

Vredeveldt, A. (2019). Getuigenverhoor bij de rechter-commissaris: De invloed van overleg tussen getuigen [Eyewitness interviews by the investigative judge: The influence of discussion between witnesses]. Nederlands Juristenblad, 2, 119-122.

Vredeveldt, A. & Tredoux, C. G. (2017). The Eye-Closure Interview: The practical utility of instructing eyewitnesses to close their eyes. In P.A. Granhag, R. Bull, A. Shaboltas & E. Dozortseva (Eds.), Psychology and Law in Europe: When West meets East (pp. 231-246). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Vredeveldt, A., Deuren, S. van, & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). Remembering with a stranger: Comparing acquainted and unacquainted pairs in collaborative eyewitness interviews. Memory, 27, 1390-1403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1662052

Vredeveldt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Recounting a common experience: On the effectiveness of instructing eyewitness pairs. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 284. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00284

Vredeveldt, A., Groen, R. N., Ampt, J.E. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). When discussion between eyewitnesses helps memory. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12097

Vredeveldt, A., Hildebrandt, A. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Acknowledge, repeat, rephrase, elaborate: Witnesses can help each other remember more. Memory, 24, 669–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2015.1042884

Vredeveldt, A., Kesteloo, L. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Samen of apart: De invloed van overleg tussen agenten tijdens het opstellen van het proces-verbaal [Together or separate: The influence of discussion between police officers while writing incident reports]. Apeldoorn: Programma Politie & Wetenschap.

Vredeveldt, A., Kesteloo, L. & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Writing alone or together: Police officers’ collaborative reports of an incident. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(7), 1071–1092. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818771721

Boer, M.M. de, Wiznitzer, S.N.P. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Foreign DNA in cosmetic gel nails. Forensic Science International, 319, 110677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110677

Es, R.M.S. van, Doorn, J. van, Keijser, J.W. de & Kunst, M.J.J. (2020). Het effect van een pro Justitia-rapportage op de bewijsbeslissing: Een empirische verkenning [The effect of a forensic mental health report on the decision of proof: A empirical reconnaissance]. Recht der Werkelijkheid, 41(2), 15-36.

Es, R.M.S. van, Keijser, J.W. de, Kunst, M.J.J & Doorn, J. van (2020). Het effect van een Pro Justitia rapportage op de bewijsbeslissing: Een pilot experiment [The effect of a forensic mental health report on the decision of proof: A pilot experiment]. In: Horselenberg, R.; Koppen, V. van; Keijser, J.W. de (Eds.) Bakens in de rechtspsychologie: Liber amicorum voor Peter van Koppen (pp. 285-298). Den Haag: Boom Criminologie.

Kesteloo, L., & Vredeveldt, A. (2021). Bodycambeelden als controlemiddel in de strafrechtspraktijk [Body-worn camera footage as a monitoring tool in the practice of criminal law]. Nederlands Juristenblad, 13, 966-973.

Koppen, P.J. van & Horselenberg, R. (2019). Een kleine Netflix-gids voor de bewijsliefhebber [A concise Netflix guide for the evidence afficionado]. Expertise en Recht, 2019, 79-86.

Koppen, M.V. van, & Nieuwkamp, R. (2017). Alibi’s. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 249-260). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Maegherman, E., Ask, K., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2021). Law and order effects: On cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Advance online publication, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268

Nieuwkamp, R. (2018). Where I was and how I will prove it. On the believability of alibis. Enschede: Gildeprint.

Nieuwkamp, R., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). A lie and a mistress: On increasing the believability of your alibi. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 23, 733-745. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1142934

Nieuwkamp, R., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). The illusion of the perfect alibi: Establishing the base rate of non-offenders’ alibis. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 14, 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1470

Nieuwkamp, R., Horselenberg, R. & Koppen, P.J. van (2019). True and false alibis among prisoners and its detection by police officers. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 25, 902-921. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1482570

Schimmel, L.M.C. & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Verdachten testen: Testgebruik in de forensische psychologie [Testing suspects: The use of tests by forensic psychologists]. De Psycholoog, 52, 34-42.

Vredeveldt, A., Kesteloo, L. & Hildebrandt, A. (2020). De rol van bodycambeelden in de opsporing en bewijsvoering. Politiewetenschap, 119, 1-85.

Vredeveldt, A., Kesteloo, L., & Hildebrandt, A. (in press). To watch or not to watch: When reviewing body-worn camera footage improves police reports. Law and Human Behavior. http://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000462

Eeden, C.A.J. van den, Berkel, J.J. van, Lankhaar, C.C., & Poot, C.J. de (2021). Opsporen, vervolgen en tegenhouden van cybercriminaliteit [Investigating, prosecuting and obstructing cybercrime]. WODC.

Eeden, C.A.J. van den, Ost, J., Poot, C.J. de & Koppen, P.J. van (2018). Solving the puzzle: The effects of contextual information and feedback on the interpretation of a crime scene. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 15, 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1494

Eeden, C.A.J. van den, Poot, C.J. de & Koppen, P.J. van (2016). Forensic expectation: Investigating a crime scene with prior information. Science and Justice, 56, 475-481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2016.08.003

Eeden, C.A.J. van den, Poot, C.J. de & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). From emergency call to crime scene: Information transference in the criminal investigation. Forensic Science Policy and Management, 8, 79-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19409044.2017.1385660

Elffers, H. & Kemp, J.J. van der (2016) Als je nou politiecijfers combineert met slachtofferenquêtes, dan … ben je nog nergens. Wat nu? Cahiers Politiestudies: Meten is Weten, 41(4), 43-55.

Koppen, P.J. van & Horselenberg, R. (2017). Kijk met een open blik naar cold cases [Keep an open mind with cold cases]. De Standaard (31 oktober).

Koppen, P.J. van & Horselenberg, R. (2018). Van toneelspelende politiemensen en onwetende verdachten die bekennen tegen Mr. Big [Of play-acting police officers and ignorant suspects who confess to Mr. Big]. Strafblad.

Koppen, P.J. van, Kemp, J.J. van der & Wijkman, M.D.S. (2019). Rapporteren over activiteiten op de plaats delict: Over de keuze tussen daders [Reporting on activities at the crime scene: About the choice between offenders]. Expertise en Recht, 2019, 96-104.

Nortje, A., Tredoux, C. G., & Vredeveldt, A.(2020). Eyewitness identification of multiple perpetrators. South African Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(2), 348-381.

Pike, G.E., Brace, N.A., Turner, J., & Vredeveldt, A. (2019). The effect of facial composite construction on eyewitness identification accuracy in an ecologically valid paradigm. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46, 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818811376

Pike, G.E., Brace, N.A., Turner, J., Ness, H. & Vredeveldt, A. (2019). Advances in facial composite technology, utilizing holistic construction, do not lead to an increase in eyewitness misidentifications compared to older feature-based systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01962

Sporer, S. L., Tredoux, C. G., Vredeveldt, A., Kempen, K., & Nortje, A. (2020). Does exposure to facial composites damage eyewitness memory? A comprehensive review. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34, 1166-1179. http://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3705

Tredoux, C. G., Sporer, S. L.,Vredeveldt, A., Kempen, K., & Nortje, A. (2020). Does constructing a facial composite affect eyewitness memory? A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09432-z

Kemp, J.J. van der & Koppen, P.J. van (2017). Profilering in de opsporing [Profiling in criminal investigations]. In P.J. van Koppen, J.W. de Keijser, R. Horselenberg & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Routes van het recht: Over de rechtspsychologie (pp. 217-247). Den Haag: Boom Juridisch.

Tonkin, M., Pakkanen, T., Sirén, J., Bennell, C., Woodhams, J., Burrell, A., Imre, H., Winter, J.M., Lam, E., Brinke, G. ten, Webb, M., Labuschagne, G.N., Ashmore-Hills, L., Kemp, J.J. van der, Lipponen, S., Rainbow, L., Salfati, C.G. & Santtila, P. (2017). Using offender crime scene behavior to link stranger sexual assaults: A comparison of three statistical approaches. Journal of Criminal Justice, 50, 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.04.002

Vogel, V. de, Wijkman, M. D. S. & de Vries Robbe, M. (2017). Violence risk assessment in women. In J. Ireland & C. Ireland (Eds.), Violent and sexual offenders: Assessment, treatment and management. Cullompton: Willan.

Wijkman, M. D. S. (2016). Vrouwen kunnen ook verkrachters zijn [Women can be rapists, too]. EOS Wetenschap.

Wijkman, M. D. S. (2017). Female incest offenders. In F. Bernat & K. Frailing (Eds.), The encyclopedia of women and crime. New Jersey: Wiley.

Wijkman, M. D. S. & Sandler, J. (2017). Female sexual offenders. In P. Lussier & E. Beauregard (Eds.), Sexual offending: A criminological perspective. New Jersey: Wiley.