Governing Framework
Flawed assumptions about human psychology are a central weakness of credibility assessment in refugee status decision-making.1 Psychology evidence – the scientific community’s best available information about how people in studied populations think and act – can improve these kinds of judgments. This evidence can help decision-makers to avoid a potentially fatal mistake: rejecting truthful testimony.2
The Baseline Paper Series addresses psychological responses that refugee status decision-makers commonly assume are too unusual to be believed. These papers make clear when the relevant body of empirical studies has established that these responses are, on the contrary, entirely unremarkable: ‘well within the range of normal human experience.’
If a certain way of thinking or acting is common enough among the people who have been studied, why should a claimant be disbelieved because they thought or acted this way? This evidence should push decision-makers to rethink or better support their reasons for concluding that a claimant is lying.
References
1 Researchers have for decades observed that decision-makers often rely on flawed psychological assumptions when they conclude that claimants are lying. For a recent review, see ASS Jarlner, ME Hertz, MA Heyl, T Gammeltoft-Hansen & WH Byrne, “Credibility as a fuzzy concept in refugee law: a systematic literature review” (2026) Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 1–31 https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2026.2619660 (external link) . See e.g. L Affolter, “Regular matters: credibility determination and the institutional habitus in a Swiss asylum office” (2021) 9:1 Comparative Migration Studies 1 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-020-00215-z (external link) ; E Bailey, Z Given-Wilson & A Memon, “Perceived Credibility of Asylum Claimants: The Role of Decision-Maker Affect and Asylum Seeker’s Emotions” (2025) Psychology, Crime & Law 1–19 https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2025.2595459 (external link) ; H Baillot, S Cowan & VE Munro, “Seen but Not Heard? Parallels and Dissonances in the Treatment of Rape Narratives across the Asylum and Criminal Justice Contexts” (2009) 36:2 Journal of Law and Society 195 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2009.00463.x (external link) ; H Baillot, S Cowan & VE Munro, “Reason to Disbelieve: Evaluating the Rape Claims of Women Seeking Asylum in the UK” (2014) 10:1 International Journal of Law in Context 105–139 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552313000396 (external link) ; D Ballucci & S Ghebrai, “(De)Constructing Credibility: Examining the Power of Childhood in Unaccompanied Refugee Decision-Making” (2023) 21:3 Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies 291–304 https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2021.1975009 (external link) ; SC Bishop, “‘What does a torture survivor look like?’ Nonverbal communication in US asylum interviews and hearings” (2021) 15:1 Journal of International and Intercultural Communication 1 https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2021.188114 (external link) ; E Bodström, “Asylum Decisions as Performances: Intertextuality in Internal Credibility Assessment” (2020) 32:4 International Journal of Refugee Law 623 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeab001 (external link) ; E Bodström, “‘Because Migri Says So’: Legitimation in Negative Asylum Decisions in Finland” (2020) 10:2 Nordic Journal of Migration Research 5 https://doi.org/10.33134/njmr.134 (external link) ; L Bradley & H Farber, “Virtually Incredible: Rethinking Deference to Demeanor When Assessing Credibility in Asylum Cases Conducted by Video Teleconference” (2022) 36 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 515; C Bohmer & A Shuman, “Producing Epistemologies of Ignorance in the Political Asylum Application Process” (2007) 14:5 Identities 603–629 https://doi.org/10.1080/10702890701662607 (external link) ; JR Campbell, “Examining Procedural Unfairness and Credibility Findings in the UK Asylum System” (March 2020) 39 Refugee Survey Quarterly 56–75 https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdz017 (external link) ; A Chan, “Establishing (Un)certainty: Language and Reproducing Suspicion in Forensic Medical Evaluations” (2026) 41:2 Refuge 1 https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.41698 (external link) ; J Cohen, “Questions of Credibility: Omissions, Discrepancies and Errors of Recall in the Testimony of Asylum Seekers” (2001) 13:3 International Journal of Refugee Law 293 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/13.3.293 (external link) ; R Dowd, J Hunter, B Liddell, J McAdam, A Nickerson & R Bryant, “Filling Gaps and Verifying Facts: Assumptions and Credibility Assessment in the Australian Refugee Review Tribunal” (2018) 30:1 International Journal of Refugee Law 71–103 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eey017 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, “Refugee Status Determinations and the Limits of Memory” (2010) 22:4 International Journal of Refugee Law 469–511 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeq041 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, “Risk and the Reasonable Refugee: Exploring a Key Credibility Inference in Canadian Refugee Status Rejections” (2023) 35:1 International Journal of Refugee Law 10–36 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eead022 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, “Risk Theory and ‘Subjective Fear’: The Role of Risk Perception, Assessment, and Management in Refugee Status Determinations” (2008) 20:4 International Journal of Refugee Law 567 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/een032 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, “Sin of Omission: Exploring a Key Credibility Inference in Canadian Refugee Status Rejections” (2023) 60:1 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 127–174 https://doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.3877 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, J Herlihy & M Hynie, “Investigating deception findings in Canadian refugee status rejections: legal inferences and psychological assumptions” (2025) 32 Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 949–975 https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2024.2404862 (external link) ; H Evans Cameron, S Rehaag & K Friesen, “The Effect of an ‘Appearance, Presentation and Demeanour’ Instruction on Credibility and Deception Judgements in a Mock Refugee Hearing” (2025) 37:1 Journal of Law and Social Policy 1 https://doi.org/10.60082/0829-3929.1492 (external link) ; C Gerken, “Credibility, Trauma, and the Law: Domestic Violence-Based Asylum Claims in the United States” (2022) 30:3 Feminist Legal Studies 255–280 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-022-09493-7 (external link) ; Z Given-Wilson, J Herlihy & M Hodes, “Telling the story: A psychological review on assessing adolescents’ asylum claims” (2016) 57:1 Canadian Psychology 16 https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000077 (external link) ; Z Given-Wilson, J Herlihy & M Hodes, “A review of adolescent autobiographical memory and the implications for unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors’ refugee determinations” (2018) 23:4 Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry 635 https://doi.org/10.1177/13591045177486 (external link) ; PA Granhag, LA Stromwall & M Hartwig, “Granting asylum or not? Migration Board personnel’s beliefs about deception” (2005) 31:1 Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29 https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183042000305672 (external link) ; J Herlihy, P Scragg & S Turner, “Discrepancies in autobiographical memories—implications for the assessment of asylum seekers: repeated interviews study” (2002) 324 British Medical Journal 324 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7333.324 (external link) ; J Herlihy, K Gleeson & S Turner, “What Assumptions about Human Behaviour Underlie Asylum Judgments?” (2010) 22:3 International Journal of Refugee Law 351–366 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeq027 (external link) ; J Herlihy & S Turner, “Untested Assumptions: Psychological Research and Credibility Assessment in Legal Decision-Making” (2015) 6 European Journal of Psychotraumatology 27380 https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v6.27380 (external link) ; M Hertz & AS Stage Jarlner, “Trans ‘Enough’ for Protection? Experimenting with Credibility in Refugee Status Determination” (2025) 7 Frontiers in Human Dynamics https://doi.org/10.3389/fhumd.2025.1625988 (external link) ; M Holland, “Stories for Asylum: Narrative and Credibility in the United States’ Political Asylum Application” (2018) 34:2 Refuge 28; J Hunter, L Pearson, M San Roque & Z Steel, “Asylum Adjudication, Mental Health and Credibility Evaluation” (2013) 41:3 Federal Law Review 471–495 https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X1304100304 (external link) ; M Jacquemet, “Asylum and Superdiversity: The Search for Denotational Accuracy during Asylum Hearings” (2015) 44 Language & Communication 72–81 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2014.10.016 (external link) ; L Johannesson, “The Symbolic Life of Courts: How Judicial Language, Actions, and Objects Legitimize Credibility Assessments of Asylum Appeals” (2023) 24 Journal of International Migration and Integration 791–809 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-022-00989-4 (external link) ; O Jubany, “Constructing Truths in a Culture of Disbelief: Understanding Asylum Screening from Within” (2011) 26:1 International Sociology 74–94 https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580910380978 (external link) ; M Kagan, “Believable Victims: Asylum Credibility and the Struggle for Objectivity” (2015) Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 904; M Kagan, “Is Truth in the Eye of the Beholder? Objective Credibility Assessment in Refugee Status Determination” (2003) 17:3 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 367–415 https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/633 (external link) ; M Kagan, “Refugee Credibility Assessment and the 'Religious Imposter' Problem: A Case Study of Eritrean Pentecostal Claims in Egypt” (2010) 43:5 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1179; F Kendall, “‘Catch-22’? : The Assessment of Credibility in UK Asylum Applications" (2022) 2:1 New Sociological Perspectives 75 https://nsp.lse.ac.uk/ (external link) ; C Ludt, M Bjørnholt & B Niklasson, “Speaking the Unspeakable: Disclosures of Sexual and Gender-based Violence in Asylum Credibility Assessments” (2022) 40:3 Nordic Journal of Human Rights 441 https://doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2022.2151222 (external link) ; T Luker, “Decision Making Conditioned by Radical Uncertainty: Credibility Assessment at the Australian Refugee Review Tribunal” (2013) 25:3 International Journal of Refugee Law 502–534 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eet043 (external link) ; D McDonald, “Credibility Assessment in Refugee Status Determination" (2014) 26:2 National Law School of India Review 115 https://repository.nls.ac.in/nlsir/vol26/iss2/2 (external link) ; D McDonald-Norman, “No One to Bear Witness: Country Information and LGBTQ Asylum Seekers” (2017) 33:2 Refuge 88–100 https://doi.org/10.7202/1043066ar (external link) ; J Millbank, “‘The Ring of Truth’: A Case Study of Credibility Assessment in Particular Social Group Refugee Determinations" (2009) 21:1 International Journal of Refugee Law 1 https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/een040 (external link) ; A Mosley, “Re-Victimization and the Asylum Process: Jimenez Ferreira v Lynch: Re-Assessing the Weight Placed on Credible Fear Interviews in Determining Credibility” (2018) 36 Law & Inequality 315–344 https://doi.org/10.24926/25730037.583 (external link) ; S Rehaag, “‘I Simply do not Believe...’: A Case Study of Credibility Determinations in Canadian Refugee Adjudication" (2017) 38 Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues 38 https://ssrn.com/abstract=2997648 (external link) ; S Rehaag & H Evans Cameron, “Experimenting with Credibility in Refugee Adjudication: Gaydar” (2020) 9 Canadian Journal of Human Rights 1-34 https://doi.org/10.32920/22341316 (external link) ; J Rinaldi & S Fernando, "Queer Credibility in the Homonation-State: Interrogating the Affective Impacts of Credibility Assessments on Racialized Sexual Minority Refugee Claimants" (2019) 35:1 Refuge 24 https://doi.org/10.7202/1060673ar (external link) ; L Rose & Z Given-Wilson, “‘What Is Truth?’ Negotiating Christian Convert Asylum Seekers’ Credibility” (2021) 697:1 The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 221–235 https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162211059454 (external link) ; H Rogers, S Fox & J Herlihy, “The Importance of Looking Credible: The Impact of the Behavioural Sequelae of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder on the Credibility of Asylum Seekers” (2015) 21:2 Psychology, Crime & Law 139–155 https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2014.951643 (external link) ; H Selim, J Korkman, E Pirjatanniemi & J Antfolk, “Asylum claims based on sexual orientation: a review of psycho-legal issues in credibility assessments” (2023) 29:10 Psychology, Crime & Law 1001 https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2022.2044038 (external link) ; H Selim, J Korkman, P Nynäs, E Pirjatanniemi & J Antfolk, "A review of psycho-legal issues in credibility assessments of asylum claims based on religion" (2023) 30:6 Psychiatry Psychology & Law 760 https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2022.2116611 (external link) ; H Selim, P Lindblad, J Vanto, J Skrifvars, A Alvesalo-Kuusi, J Korkman, E Pirjatanniemi & J Antfolk, "(In)credibly queer? Assessments of asylum claims based on sexual orientation" (2025) 30 Legal & Criminological Psychology 159 https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12278 (external link) ; J Skrifvars, V Sui, J Antfolk, T van Veldhuizen, & J Korkman, “Psychological assumptions underlying credibility assessments in Finnish asylum determinations” (2024) 76:1 Nordic Psychology 55 https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2022.2145986 (external link) ; KE Smeda, "Truth or Dare: A Framework for Analyzing Credibility in Children Seeking Asylum" (2017) 50:2 Cornell International Law Journal 307 https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cllsrp/13 (external link) ; L Smith-Khan, “Incorporating Sociolinguistic Perspectives in Australian Refugee Credibility Assessments: The Case of CRL18” (2023) 24 Journal of International Migration and Integration 727–743 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-022-00937-2 (external link) ; P Spinhoven, T Bean, L Eurelings-Bontekoe, "Inconsistencies in the self-report of traumatic experiences by unaccompanied refugee minors" (2006) 19:5 Journal of Traumatic Stress 663-73 10.1002/jts.20152 (external link) ; K Tay, N Frommer, J Hunter, D Silove, L Pearson, MS Roque, R Redman, RA Bryant, V Manicavasagar & Z Steel, “A Mixed-Method Study of Expert Psychological Evidence Submitted for a Cohort of Asylum Seekers Undergoing Refugee Status Determination in Australia” (2013) 98 Social Science & Medicine 106–115 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.029 (external link) ; R Thomas, “Assessing the Credibility of Asylum Claims: EU and UK Approaches Examined” (2006) 8:1 European Journal of Migration & Law 79 https://ssrn.com/abstract=2144438 (external link) ; H Tužinská, “The Communicative Space: Painting the Evidence and Plausibility in Asylum Court Hearings” (2025) 34:6 Social & Legal Studies 832 https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639241307604 (external link) ; H Wikström & T Johansson, "Credibility Assessments as 'Normative Leakage': Asylum Applications, Gender and Class" (2013) 1:2 Social Inclusion 92-101 https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v1i2.115 (external link) ; A Vogl, Judging Refugees: Narrative and Oral Testimony in Refugee Status Determination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024); A Vogl, “Telling Stories from Start to Finish: Exploring the Demand for Narrative in Refugee Testimony” (2013) 22:1 Griffith Law Review 63–86 https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2013.10854767 (external link) ; S Zisakou, “Credibility Assessment in Asylum Claims Based on Sexual Orientation by the Greek Asylum Service: A Deep-Rooted Culture of Disbelief” (2021) 3 Frontiers in Human Dynamics 693308 https://doi.org/10.3389/fhumd.2021.693308 (external link) .
2 See H Evans Cameron, Refugee Law’s Fact-Finding Crisis: Truth, Risk, and the Wrong Mistake (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018)