Does Ego Depletion Elicit Stronger Cues of Deception?

Sarah C Volz, Marc-André Reinhard, P. Müller
{"title":"Does Ego Depletion Elicit Stronger Cues of Deception?","authors":"Sarah C Volz, Marc-André Reinhard, P. Müller","doi":"10.1515/psych-2022-0129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Lying is cognitively demanding and presumably requires self-regulation. According to ego depletion theory, a task that requires self-regulation should therefore impair an individual’s ability to tell a convincing lie in a later task. Consequently, it was hypothesized that a manipulation of ego depletion would enhance behavioral differences between liars and truth-tellers. To manipulate ego depletion, participants worked (vs. did not work) on a task in which they had to suppress dominant responses while copying a text. Subsequently, they talked in a simulated job interview about a job they had previously held (vs. not held). In the sample of 164 participants, there was no evidence to support the hypothesis; the expected Ego Depletion x Veracity interaction was not significant for any of the 15 behavioral cues coded in the videotaped interviews. Although the main effect of ego depletion was significant at the multivariate level for the first of two parts of the interview, none of the univariate main effects reached the significance level corrected for multiple testing. Bayesian analyses rendered moderate to strong evidence in favor of the null hypothesis. Possible implications of the results are discussed, also those related to ego depletion theory.","PeriodicalId":74357,"journal":{"name":"Open psychology","volume":"4 1","pages":"278 - 291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/psych-2022-0129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Lying is cognitively demanding and presumably requires self-regulation. According to ego depletion theory, a task that requires self-regulation should therefore impair an individual’s ability to tell a convincing lie in a later task. Consequently, it was hypothesized that a manipulation of ego depletion would enhance behavioral differences between liars and truth-tellers. To manipulate ego depletion, participants worked (vs. did not work) on a task in which they had to suppress dominant responses while copying a text. Subsequently, they talked in a simulated job interview about a job they had previously held (vs. not held). In the sample of 164 participants, there was no evidence to support the hypothesis; the expected Ego Depletion x Veracity interaction was not significant for any of the 15 behavioral cues coded in the videotaped interviews. Although the main effect of ego depletion was significant at the multivariate level for the first of two parts of the interview, none of the univariate main effects reached the significance level corrected for multiple testing. Bayesian analyses rendered moderate to strong evidence in favor of the null hypothesis. Possible implications of the results are discussed, also those related to ego depletion theory.
自我耗尽是否会引发更强的欺骗线索?
说谎是一种认知要求,可能需要自我调节。根据自我损耗理论,需要自我调节的任务因此会削弱个体在随后的任务中说出令人信服的谎言的能力。因此,有人假设,操纵自我耗尽会增强说谎者和说真话者之间的行为差异。为了操纵自我耗竭,参与者在完成一项任务时(对照不完成)必须在抄写文本时抑制主导反应。随后,他们在模拟的工作面试中谈论了他们以前做过的工作(与没有做过的工作)。在164名参与者的样本中,没有证据支持这一假设;预期的自我损耗与准确性的相互作用对录像访谈中编码的15个行为线索中的任何一个都不显著。虽然自我耗竭的主效应在访谈的第一部分的多变量水平上是显著的,但没有一个单变量主效应达到多重检验校正的显著性水平。贝叶斯分析提供了中等到强烈的证据支持零假设。讨论了结果的可能含义,以及与自我耗尽理论相关的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信