Abstract
People are poor lie detectors, but accuracy can be improved by making the judgment indirectly. In a typical demonstration, participants are not told that the experiment is about deception at all. Instead, they judge whether the speaker appears, say, tense or not. Surprisingly, these indirect judgments better reflect the speaker’s veracity. A common explanation is that participants have an implicit awareness of deceptive behavior, even when they cannot explicitly identify it. We propose an alternative explanation. Attending to a range of behaviors, as explicit raters do, can lead to conflict: A speaker may be thinking hard (indicating deception) but not tense (indicating honesty). In 2 experiments, we show that the judgment (and in turn the correct classification rate) is the result of attending to a single behavior, as indirect raters are instructed to do. Indirect lie detection does not access implicit knowledge, but simply focuses the perceiver on more useful cues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 342-355 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied |
Volume | 21 |
Issue number | 4 |
Early online date | 1 Aug 2015 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Dec 2015 |
Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The focal account: Indirect lie detection need not access unconscious, implicit knowledge'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Press/Media
-
Indirect Lie Detection is not Evidence of an Unconscious Ability
Chris Street
21/10/15
1 Media contribution
Press/Media: Research