No evidence that instructions to ignore nonverbal cues improve deception detection accuracy

被引:2
|
作者
Bogaard, Glynis [1 ]
Meijer, Ewout H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Maastricht Univ, Sect Forens Psychol, Dept Clin Psychol Sci, Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
credibility; instructions; lie detection; nonverbal cues; verbal cues; POLICE OFFICERS; LIE DETECTION; BELIEFS; CREDIBILITY; JUDGMENTS; IMPACT; INFORMATION; STATEMENTS; ABILITY; TRUTH;
D O I
10.1002/acp.3950
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Research has consistently shown people predominantly rely on undiagnostic nonverbal cues when detecting deceit, whereas verbal cues are more accurate. In three experiments, we investigated whether the simple instruction not to focus on nonverbal cues would make people focus more on diagnostic verbal cues and hence more accurate in detecting lies. Participants judged the veracity of true and deceptive statements and either received (1) no instruction, (2) the instruction to ignore nonverbal cues, or (3) to ignore nonverbal cues and focus on verbal cues instead. In the second and third experiments, condition 3 was changed to an audio condition in which visual cues were inaccessible. Results showed no effect of instruction on lie detection performance. Overall, we found no evidence that the simple instruction not to focus on nonverbal cues while judging veracity is an effective strategy to make people focus more on verbal cues or to improve lie detection.
引用
收藏
页码:636 / 647
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Is Interactional Dissynchrony a Clue to Deception? Insights From Automated Analysis of Nonverbal Visual Cues
    Yu, Xiang
    Zhang, Shaoting
    Yan, Zhennan
    Yang, Fei
    Huang, Junzhou
    Dunbar, Norah E.
    Jensen, Matthew L.
    Burgoon, Judee K.
    Metaxas, Dimitris N.
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS, 2015, 45 (03) : 506 - 520
  • [32] Deception detection through automatic, unobtrusive analysis of nonverbal behavior
    Meservy, TO
    Jensen, ML
    Kruse, J
    Burgoon, JK
    Nunamaker, JF
    Twitchell, DP
    Tsechpenakis, G
    Metaxas, DN
    IEEE INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, 2005, 20 (05) : 36 - 43
  • [33] NONVERBAL AND CONTENT FACTORS IN THE DETECTION OF DECEPTION IN PLANNED AND SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
    LITTLEPAGE, GE
    TANG, DW
    PINEAULT, MA
    JOURNAL OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 1986, 1 (03): : 439 - 450
  • [34] Nonverbal cues: Clues to the detection of foreign language anxiety
    Gregersen, TS
    FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS, 2005, 38 (03) : 388 - 400
  • [35] Examining Sender and Judge Variability in Honesty Assessments and Deception Detection Accuracy: Evidence for a Transparent Liar but No Evidence of Deception-General Ability
    Levine, Timothy R.
    COMMUNICATION RESEARCH REPORTS, 2016, 33 (03) : 188 - 194
  • [36] Motion Profiles for Deception Detection Using Visual Cues
    Michael, Nicholas
    Dilsizian, Mark
    Metaxas, Dimitris
    Burgoon, Judee K.
    COMPUTER VISION - ECCV 2010, PT VI, 2010, 6316 : 462 - +
  • [37] How do teachers perceive cheating students? Beliefs about cues to deception and detection accuracy in the educational field
    Marksteiner, Tamara
    Reinhard, Marc-Andre
    Dickhaeuser, Oliver
    Sporer, Siegfried Ludwig
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY OF EDUCATION, 2012, 27 (03) : 329 - 350
  • [38] How do teachers perceive cheating students? Beliefs about cues to deception and detection accuracy in the educational field
    Tamara Marksteiner
    Marc-André Reinhard
    Oliver Dickhäuser
    Siegfried Ludwig Sporer
    European Journal of Psychology of Education, 2012, 27 : 329 - 350
  • [39] The Walk of Guilt: Multimodal Deception Detection from Nonverbal Motion Behaviour
    Alghowinem, Sharifa
    Caldwell, Sabrina
    Radwan, Ibrahim
    Wagner, Michael
    Gedeon, Tom
    INFORMATION, 2025, 16 (01)
  • [40] Dietary intake measurement: Cues to improve accuracy
    Jardack, Patricia M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION, 2006, 106 (08) : 1217 - 1218