Other Project Publications

Virtual Hearings Circle Report (Jul 2025)

Authors: Hilary Evans Cameron, Marcedes Ransome, Tyler Sparrow-Mungal, Charanija Srirajasingam, Thanu Jude Xavier and Annie Yu

While recognizing that the virtual format may have benefits in refugee status hearings, the VHC project brought together twelve participants for a day-long discussion that sought to understand better its potential risks. The Report sets out their conclusions: the virtual format may increase in several ways the risk of a claimant being misunderstood or wrongly disbelieved, or of having an acutely stressful experience. 

‘I Must Have Been Confused.’ Thinking about Thinking in Refugee Status Decision-making: A Scoping Review of Metacognition Studies

Michaela Hynie, Maire L. O’Hagan, Amy E. Beaudry, Alisha C. Salerno-Ferraro, Jane Herlihy & Hilary Evans Cameron, “‘I must have been confused.’ Thinking about thinking in refugee status decision-making: a scoping review of metacognition studies” (2026) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2026.2637124 (external link) 

Refugee status adjudicators often rely on the assumption that people understand and can explain their own mental processes. This scoping review looks at metacognition (thinking about thinking) and the extent to which cognitive processes are available to conscious awareness and/or control. Its findings reveal the inaccuracy or incompleteness of metacognitive awareness.

‘Off-the-Record’ Deception Inferences in Canadian Refugee Status Decision-making: A View from the Bar

(Presented at the ‘(Re-)constructing Credibility in Refugee Status Determination’ workshop, University of Copenhagen, Oct 23, 2026; in progress) 

Authors: Hilary Evans Cameron, Anish Jammu, Maha Khawaja and Jane Herlihy

This study investigated Canadian refugee lawyers’ impressions of decision-makers’ reasoning. Its findings show areas of firm consensus that certain ‘off-the-record’ factors regularly influence deception judgments (e.g. stereotypes, emotional affect), as well as areas of disagreement and, above all, marked uncertainty (e.g. whether technological factors relating to the online environment affect deception judgments). 

Reasoning with Probability in Truth and Deception Judgments in Refugee Status Decision-making

(In progress, 2026)

Author: Hilary Evans Cameron

How likely is it that an alleged event would occur? When, why and how should the odds that such an event would occur (its ‘inherent probability’) affect a decision maker’s confidence in the claim that it did occur? The first part of this article addresses this question in the context of legal decision making generally, and the second part in the particular context of truth and deception findings in refugee status decisions.

Principled Asymmetry: Bringing Psychology Research Evidence to Refugee Status Decision-making

(Under review)

Author: Hilary Evans Cameron

This article argues that the norms developed in the Anglo-American criminal law provide helpful guidance to those who will translate psychology research evidence for use in refugee status decision making. Those doing this work should reject the notion that decision-makers will consider all relevant evidence. They should put psychology research evidence before decision-makers selectively and asymmetrically.