“Hiding is not always a bad thing,“ says Prof. Dr. Irena Bošković, associate professor of forensic psychology at Erasmus University Rotterdam (Netherlands). Last week, she gave a charismatic presentation in Vilnius at the annual conference of the European Association for Psychology and Law (EAPL), EAPL 2025, which was attended by around 250 participants from 34 countries. The conference was organised by the Research Laboratory for Applied Psychology at Mykolas Romeris University (MRU).
Prof. Dr. Irena Bošković addressed a topic that often remains hidden: positive response bias, when a person consciously withholds or embellishes information.
When silence is not a lie
According to the researcher, people conceal information not only to gain an advantage (such as custody or probation), but also to protect themselves from shame, stigmatisation or even reliving a trauma. “Concealment can sometimes reflect psychological adaptation rather than malicious intent or fraudulent behaviour,” explains Prof. Dr. I. Bošković. One of the most painful examples is the false denial of sexual abuse, when victims remain silent about the violence they have suffered. This is not only a personal tragedy, but also a danger to society as a whole if the perpetrators go unpunished.
Prof. Dr. I. Bošković and her colleagues are developing new assessment tools to uncover not only pretence but also concealment – an often invisible but significant factor in forensic psychology. One of these tools is the GIBSO method (General Inventory of Symptoms, Behaviours, and Opinions), which was developed in collaboration with Prof. Dr. Harald Merckelbach. GIBSO has already been translated into five languages. The researcher hopes for positive changes at the international level.
“When assessing concealment, it is very important to consider the context – culture, relationships, mental well-being, social pressure. Sometimes concealment is protection, not deception.”
That is why, according to Prof. Dr. I. Bošković, it is important not only to document the phenomenon, but also to investigate its causes. “We have already seen progress in the last ten years,” she says. “The validity of data is becoming an important issue not only in research but also in forensic reports. We teach our students from day one that the quality of data is the basis for everything.”
According to the researcher, one of the biggest challenges for the future is not only to recognise when a person is faking, but also when they are hiding something – in subtle ways and often even unconsciously. This requires a broader, more complex perspective: “Response bias is not just about simulation. It can take many forms, including silence. I hope that this nuanced spectrum will be more widely recognised in the future across the field of forensic psychology.”
She urges her colleagues – court psychologists and forensic experts – not to ignore subtle forms of response bias. Her goal is for our legal system's decisions to be based on accurate, comprehensive information, not omissions.