Send to

Choose Destination
Law Hum Behav. 2016 Aug;40(4):401-10. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000189. Epub 2016 Jun 27.

Less is more? Detecting lies in veiled witnesses.

Author information

Faculty of Social Science and Humanities, University of Ontario Institute of Technology.
University of Amsterdam.


Judges in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada have ruled that witnesses may not wear the niqab-a type of face veil-when testifying, in part because they believed that it was necessary to see a person's face to detect deception (Muhammad v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car, 2006; R. v. N. S., 2010; The Queen v. D(R), 2013). In two studies, we used conventional research methods and safeguards to empirically examine the assumption that niqabs interfere with lie detection. Female witnesses were randomly assigned to lie or tell the truth while remaining unveiled or while wearing a hijab (i.e., a head veil) or a niqab (i.e., a face veil). In Study 1, laypersons in Canada (N = 232) were more accurate at detecting deception in witnesses who wore niqabs or hijabs than in those who did not wear veils. Concealing portions of witnesses' faces led laypersons to change their decision-making strategies without eliciting negative biases. Lie detection results were partially replicated in Study 2, with laypersons in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands (N = 291): observers' performance was better when witnesses wore either niqabs or hijabs than when witnesses did not wear veils. These findings suggest that, contrary to judicial opinion, niqabs do not interfere with-and may, in fact, improve-the ability to detect deception. (PsycINFO Database Record.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for American Psychological Association
Loading ...
Support Center