deception Flashcards
define deception
successful or unsuccessful deliberate attempt without forewarning to create in another a belief which the communicator considers to be untrue
types of lies
outright: lies in which the information conveyed is completely different from what the liar believes to be the truth (high difficulty)
exaggerations: lies in which facts are over or understated (moderate difficulty)
concealment: concealing information by evading the question or omitting relevant details
De Paulo et al 1996
why people lie
77 college students, 70 controls kept a diary for 1 week. Record all social interactions (min 10mins) lasting 1 week. Record all social interactions and lies told during the week. People life for one of three reasons: self orientated/ other orientated, gain advantage/avoid costs, materialistic/psychological. 34% of interactions contained 1 lie, 50% self serving, 25% other orientated,60% psychological and 40% materialistic
evaluation of De Paulo et al 1996
ask participants to write down the last lie they told = no guarantee that they will recall last lie
diary of social interactions: may not be willing to report serious lies, reporting nature of social interactions may effect the nature of interactions and influence the number of lies they tell.
10 minute interaction: snapshot in a lab setting
Tyler et al 2006
frequency of lies
10 minute convocation, participant lie on average 2.18 times. 78% reported lying during conversation i.e. academic achievement
De Paulo et al 2004
frequency of lies
serious lies most often originate, from behaviour which the target of the lie would perceive as bad (immorale..)
20% to avoid punishment
32% instrumental lies - material gain, advantage, personal pleasure
29% psychological
10% protect others
Vrij 2008
detecting deception
compared 39 studies conducted after 1980, 56.6% lies and truths correctly detected
Bond & De Paulo 2006
detecting deception
meta-analysis of 206 studies. Overall accuracy of 53.98% no difference between experts and non-experts
Zuckerman et al 1981 multifactor model
3 factors could influence cues to deception and may influence a liars nonverbal behaviour and emphasis a different aspect of deception.
emotional: lying has been associated with increased fear, guilt and excitement. emotions increase verbal and non verbal behaviours
cognitive effort: lying can require extra mental effort and several aspects of lying contribute to an increased mental load
attempted behavioural control: liars realise that observers pay attention to their behavioural reactions to judge deception
Verbal and Non-Verbal Cues - vocal cues
speech hesitations: use of fillers eg um er
speech errors: grammatical errors and or sentence repetition, false starts
pitch: changes of pitch can rise or fall
rate: no of spoken words in a certain period of time
Verbal and Non-Verbal Cues - visual cues
gaze/smile
self adaptors: scratching head/hand
illustrator: hand and arm movements designed to modify and/or supplement spoken word
Gregg 2007
Verbal and Non-Verbal Cues
latency period (silence between question and answer) was shown more by liars than truth tellers
Klaver et al 2007
Verbal and Non-Verbal Cues
no difference in hesitations speech errors and pause frequency between liars and truth tellers
verbal behaviour
negative statements: indicate aversion toward and object/person/opinion
generalising: use of words i.e. always/everybody
self-referencing: use of spoken words referring to the speaker
lexical diversity: number of different words in a statement divided by the number of words in a statement
Bond et al 2005
verbal behaviour
no difference in use of negative statements or self references
Vrij 2006
verbal behaviour
no difference in response length
Nahari et al 2012
verbal behaviour
30 participants were asked to write a statement in which they either told the truth or lied about a recent activity. Liars included less verifiable details but the same amount of non-verifiable details than truth tellers than truth tellers. Based on the verifiable details, more truth tellers than liars were correctly identified (78.9%) than based on the total number of details (63.2%)
Vrij et al 2010
verbal behaviour
individuals fail to catch liars because they are unmotivated/lie detection is difficult and because they make systematic errors in the detection of lies:
examine wrong cues - gaze aversion most frequently associated with lying (51 out of 58 countries)
overemphasis of non-verbal cues - observers may rely on speech content when detecting lies
Othello effect - too readily interpret certain behaviour particularly nervousness (truth tellers can be innocent too)
