Home › Polygraph Research › Researchers › Pär Anders Granhag
Researcher file
Pär Anders Granhag
Deception detection, investigative interviewing, and the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique
Researcher record
About Pär Anders Granhag
Pär Anders Granhag is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, where he received his B.A. and Ph.D. degrees. In 2000, he became the Founding Director of the research unit for Criminal, Legal, and Investigative Psychology, and has for 30 years conducted research on deception detection, interview and interrogation techniques, and investigative psychology. He has published over 200 scientific reports on topics relating to deception detection.
Granhag is internationally recognized as the co-developer of the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique, a groundbreaking interrogation method that has fundamentally changed how investigators approach suspect interviews. The SUE technique has pioneered a new line of research centering on strategic ways of interviewing suspects in order to elicit cues to truth and deception. The technique focuses on the strategic timing and disclosure of evidence during interviews to detect inconsistencies in suspects' statements, moving away from confrontational approaches toward information-gathering methods. Officers trained in SUE achieved a higher deception detection accuracy rate (65%) compared to untrained interviewers (43%).
He is the author/editor of ten books, including Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004) and Detecting Deception: Current Challenges and Cognitive Approaches (Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2015). He is the past President of the European Association of Psychology and Law, and the past editor of Applied Cognitive Psychology. Granhag has been cited by over 11,000 publications, reflecting his profound influence on the field. His work has been adopted internationally by law enforcement and intelligence agencies seeking evidence-based interrogation methods.
He has published extensively in the field of legal and criminological psychology, particularly on deception and eyewitness testimony, and conducts training of law-enforcement personnel. His work spans multiple disciplines including investigative psychology, forensic psychology, and human intelligence gathering, bridging the gap between psychological research and practical application in criminal justice settings. Granhag frequently collaborates with Maria Hartwig, with whom he has co-authored numerous influential studies on deception detection and interrogation strategies.
Research methodology profile
Research areas
Co-author network
Researchers who have co-authored studies with Pär Anders Granhag.
Publications [25]
All peer-reviewed studies by Pär Anders Granhag in our database.
Reading Lies: Nonverbal Communication and Deception
Only 14 of 50 nonverbal cues (28%) showed significant relationships with deception, with effect sizes typically small (largest d = -0.55). People achieve only 54% accuracy in lie-truth judgments, barely… [002] 2016 Journal of Police and Criminal PsychologyTraining in the Strategic Use of Evidence technique: Improving deception detection accuracy of American law enforcement officers
SUE-trained interviewers achieved 65% deception detection accuracy compared to 43% for untrained interviewers, representing a 22 percentage point improvement and a medium-to-large effect size (d=0.72). Trained officers successfully implemented strategic… [003] 2015 Deception Detection: Current Challenges and New DirectionsThe strategic use of evidence technique: A conceptual overview
The SUE technique, grounded in the psychology of instrumental mind reading and counter-interrogation strategies, has demonstrated substantially improved deception detection accuracy (85.4% for trained vs. 56.1% for untrained interviewers in… [004] 2015 Deception Detection: Current Challenges and New DirectionsThe Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique: A conceptual overview
The SUE technique produces large effect sizes in distinguishing guilty from innocent suspects (d = 1.83) through statement-evidence inconsistencies, with trained interviewers achieving 65-85% accuracy compared to 43-56% for untrained… [005] 2015 Clinical Psychology: Science and PracticeDetecting Deception: Current Challenges and Cognitive Approaches
Cognitive approaches successfully detected simulation across multiple clinical domains by examining knowledge accuracy and strategic behavior patterns. Detection success depends on the extent of the deceiver's knowledge about the condition… [006] 2014 Investigative interviewingThe inconsistent suspect: A systematic review of different types of consistency in truth tellers and liars
[007] 2014 Credibility Assessment: Scientific Research and ApplicationsStrategic use of evidence during investigative interviews: The state of the science
Statement-evidence inconsistencies represent one of the strongest cues to deception in the literature (effect size d = 1.83), and trained interviewers using SUE achieved 65% deception detection accuracy compared to… [008] 2014 Applied Cognitive PsychologyHow awareness of possible evidence induces forthcoming counter-interrogation strategies
When alerted to possible evidence from surveillance cameras, guilty suspects polarized into extremely withholding or extremely forthcoming verbal strategies, while innocent suspects remained consistently forthcoming regardless of evidence awareness. [009] 2013 Legal and Criminological PsychologyEliciting cues to deception by tactical disclosure of evidence: The first test of the Evidence Framing Matrix
SUE-Incremental elicited strong cues to deception, especially for statement-evidence inconsistency. Late disclosure was more effective than early disclosure, and stepwise disclosure was more effective than direct disclosure. [010] 2013 Journal of Police and Criminal PsychologyInterviewing to elicit cues to deception: Improving strategic use of evidence with general-to-specific framing of evidence
General-to-specific evidence framing effectively discriminated between guilty and innocent suspects through differential patterns of statement-evidence inconsistency, though results only partially supported the hypotheses. Gradual disclosure strategies successfully induced guilty suspects… [011] 2013 Legal and Criminological PsychologyTwo heads are better than one? How to effectively use two interviewers to elicit cues to deception
Truth tellers provided significantly more detail than liars only in the supportive second interviewer condition, despite participants looking at the second interviewer less than 10% of the time. Liars displayed… [012] 2012 Journal of Applied Research in Memory and CognitionEliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked
The paper presents a conceptual framework proposing that researchers should focus on interview protocols that actively create differences between liars and truth-tellers rather than searching for spontaneous behavioral cues. Three… [013] 2012 Journal of Nonverbal BehaviorWindows to the Soul? Deliberate Eye Contact as a Cue to Deceit
Liars displayed significantly more deliberate eye contact than truth tellers as an impression management strategy, whereas gaze aversion showed no difference between groups. This finding challenges the widely held belief… [014] 2010 The Open Criminology JournalImpression and information management: On the strategic self-regulation of innocent and guilty suspects
Liars and truth tellers reported equal planning of demeanor and nonverbal behavior, but guilty suspects engaged substantially more in information management strategies, including preparing explanations for incriminating facts. [015] 2010 Psychological Science in the Public InterestPitfalls and Opportunities in Nonverbal and Verbal Lie Detection
[016] 2008 Psychology, Crime & LawA new theoretical perspective on deception detection: On the psychology of instrumental mind-reading
The paper presents differential behavioral predictions for guilty versus innocent suspects, including that innocent suspects rarely prepare strategies and believe in the visibility of innocence, while guilty suspects employ diverse… [017] 2007 Psychology, Crime & LawGuilty and innocent suspects' strategies during police interrogations
Guilty suspects reported significantly higher use of strategic impression management (detailed storytelling, consistency, avoiding direct lies) compared to innocent suspects. The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique improved interrogators' accuracy… [018] 2006 Psychology, Crime & LawTo act truthfully: Nonverbal behaviour and strategies during a police interrogation
No differences in nonverbal behaviors distinguished liars from truth tellers during lengthy, high-stakes police interrogations, despite liars experiencing greater internal stress. Both groups adopted similar behavioral control strategies, with the… [019] 2005 Law and Human BehaviorDetecting deception via strategic disclosure of evidence
Late disclosure of evidence improved overall detection accuracy to 61.7% compared to 42.9% for early disclosure. Deceptive statements were identified with 67.6% accuracy in the late disclosure condition, demonstrating the… [020] 2004 Cambridge University PressDeception Detection in Forensic Contexts
The volume documented that intensive recent research had produced substantial new knowledge about cross-cultural deception, simulated amnesia, false confessions, and lie-detection training. Research reviewed suggested polygraph accuracy of approximately 90%… [021] 2004 Cambridge University PressThe detection of deception in forensic contexts
The volume documents that deception detection research had shifted from merely assessing detection ability toward enhancing performance. Polygraph testing shows approximately 90% accuracy in forensic settings according to reviewed research,… [022] 2004 Psychology, Crime and LawSuspicious minds: Criminals' ability to detect deception
[023] 2003 Psychology, Crime & LawHow to Detect Deception? Arresting the Beliefs of Police Officers, Prosecutors and Judges
All three professional groups held beliefs about deception detection that contradicted scientific research, with most relying on nonverbal cues like gaze aversion and body movements that have no reliable relationship… [024] 2003 Journal of Applied Social PsychologyPartners in crime: How liars in collusion betray themselves
Lying pair members were more consistent between themselves than truth-telling pair members, while individual liars and truth tellers showed equal within-person consistency over time. Truth tellers made more commissions (new… [025] 2002 Applied Cognitive PsychologyRepeated interrogations: Verbal and non-verbal cues to deception
Liars displayed significantly fewer smiles, self-manipulations, pauses, and less gaze aversion than truth-tellers, with these differences increasing over time. Contrary to conventional wisdom, truthful and deceptive statements were equally consistent…Explore all research.
Browse our complete database of 3493 peer-reviewed polygraph studies.