Participants’ responses to the post-interrogation questionnaire will be coded, analyzed and compared across conditions. Further, the data will be analyzed as a function of the scores on the modified Hare SRP-III. Specific focus will be given to deception detection accuracy and the confidence in veracity judgments on the part of the interrogators and confidence in believability on the part of the suspects. Also, analysis of whether strategy in the interrogation room differed as a function of psychopathy will be performed. 

	Two studies to date have examined laypeople’s lie detection capacity of stimuli where the psychopathology of the message senders was measured. However, neither of these studies provided the lie catchers more than free recall to judge, thereby eliminating much of the psychopaths’ main advantage: interpersonal manipulation. Furthermore, neither of these studies examined the psychopathy measures of the lie catchers. In the same way that higher measures of psychopathy may influence an interrogator’s strategies in the interrogation room, so too may higher measures of psychopathy assist a lie catcher in determining the veracity of a stimulus video. 
	 The focus of Study 2 is lie catchers’ ability to discriminate between truths and lies as a function of psychopathy. In this study, the psychopathy measures of the interrogator, suspect, and lie catcher will all play a factor in the statistical analyses. Lie catchers with higher scores on the modified Hare SRP-III will be better able to discriminate between true and false statements than lower-scoring lie catchers. Furthermore, lie catchers will respond more positively to whichever sender (interrogator vs. suspect) scores higher on the Hare SRP-III. That is, the lie catcher will be more likely to judge the suspect as telling the truth when s/he scores higher than the interrogator, and vice versa: more likely to judge the suspect as lying when s/he scores lower than the interrogator. 

	Participants will be 100 community members recruited from a large, urban population. Participants will be randomly assigned to view a video of either a guilty or innocent suspect from Study 1. Steps will be taken to ensure that no one who participated in Study 1 would be able to reenroll in Study 2. 
	The videotapes shown to the lie catchers will be the full, 10-12 minute interrogations from Study 1. The video camera will have been positioned to show both the interrogator and the suspect. 
	Participants will each view one stimulus video. After the video has concluded, the participants will be given a questionnaire to complete. This questionnaire will assess demographic characteristics, impressions of the interrogator’s behavior, impressions of the suspect’s behavior, an explicit veracity judgment, and the confidence in that judgment.  After completing the questions regarding the stimulus material, all participants will receive the same, modified and counterbalanced Hare SRP-III as the interrogators and suspects in Study 1. Again, the questionnaire will conclude with an inquiry as to the participant’s prior experience with the law. 
	Participants’ responses to the post-stimulus questionnaire will be coded, analyzed and compared across conditions. Impressions about the interrogator and suspect will be examined as a function of their respective psychopathy scores. The data will also be analyzed as a function of the lie catchers’ scores on the modified Hare SRP-III. Specific focus will be given to deception detection accuracy and the confidence in veracity judgments made by the lie catchers. Furthermore, these judgments and confidence ratings will be examined as a function of the lie catchers’ scores on the modified Hare SRP-III. 
