In their paper ‘Evaluating credibility of witnesses—Are we instructing jurors on invalid factors?’, Vrij and Turgeon (2018) argue that jurors should be advised not to consider demeanour when trying to evaluate if witnesses are honest or dishonest because of ‘overwhelming scientific evidence’. However, in this response, we contend that substantial empirical scientific studies on nonverbal communication alongside the limitations of deception detection research, as cited by Vrij and Turgeon (2018), undermine their overall argument. While jurors should be warned about erroneous beliefs and dubious concepts on human communication, jurors should also be advised to consider demeanour as a way of enriching their overall understanding of witnesses and their verbal testimony.

中文翻译：

---

在审判期间发现欺骗：忽略证人的非语言交流不是解决方案——对 Vrij 和 Turgeon 的回应（2018）

Vrij 和 Turgeon（2018 年）在他们的论文“评估证人的可信度——我们是否在无效因素上指导陪审员？”中认为，由于“压倒性的科学性证据'。然而，在这个回应中，我们认为，如 Vrij 和 Turgeon（2018 年）所引用的，关于非语言交流的大量实证科学研究以及欺骗检测研究的局限性削弱了他们的整体论点。虽然应该警告陪审员关于人际交往的错误信念和可疑概念，但也应该建议陪审员考虑将举止作为丰富他们对证人和口头证词的整体理解的一种方式。