ABSTRACT

The major premise of statement analysis stems from empirical evidence that the recall of real events differs noticeably from fabricated accounts in (Undeutsch, 1954; Trankell, 1972; Wegener, 1989). Udo Undeutsch pioneered the technique of credibility assessment to develop relatively precise, definable criteria, that may help discern valid statements from artificial ones. This chapter outlines the original “Undeutsch Hypothesis” (Undeutsch, 1954), highlighting its complexities, limitations and its developments into Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA), (Steller and Kohnken, 1989). After much empirical testing CBCA is generally considered the most systematised aspect of the overall Statement Validity Analysis procedure.

This chapter looks at the development of credibility assessment, and emphasises the difficulties apparent to researchers when evaluating the technique. These include setting up of adequate field studies using real cases, problems of cognitive and motivational issues affecting the reliability of statements and the possible variations in the use of the criteria available to statement analysis. Although often discredited as being a relatively subjective technique, this chapter concludes that statement analysis is a means of applying psychological knowledge, not a conclusion generator in its own right.