通过省略信息撒谎时的言语暗示:检验标准陈述访谈协议的效果

Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Jennifer Burkhardt, Oliwia Dabrowna, Ronald P. Fisher
{"title":"通过省略信息撒谎时的言语暗示:检验标准陈述访谈协议的效果","authors":"Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Jennifer Burkhardt, Oliwia Dabrowna, Ronald P. Fisher","doi":"10.5093/ejpalc2023a1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/objectives: Practitioners frequently inform us that lying through omitting information is relevant to them, yet this topic has been largely ignored by verbal lie detection researchers. Method: In the present experiment participants watched a video recording of a secret meeting between three people. Truth tellers were instructed to recall the meeting truthfully, and lie tellers were instructed to pretend that one person (John) was not there. Participants were or were not exposed to a Model Statement during the interview. The dependent variables were ‘total details’ and ‘complications’. Results: Truth tellers reported more complications than lie tellers but lie tellers reported more details than truth tellers. The Model Statement resulted in more complications and details being reported. The Veracity x Model Statement interaction effect was not significant. In terms of self-reported strategies, the main veracity difference was that truth tellers were more inclined to ‘be detailed” than lie tellers. Discussion: We discuss the atypical finding (most details reported by lie tellers) and ideas for future research.","PeriodicalId":344860,"journal":{"name":"The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Verbal Cues to Deceit when Lying through Omitting Information: Examining the Effect of a Model Statement Interview Protocol\",\"authors\":\"Sharon Leal, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, Jennifer Burkhardt, Oliwia Dabrowna, Ronald P. Fisher\",\"doi\":\"10.5093/ejpalc2023a1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background/objectives: Practitioners frequently inform us that lying through omitting information is relevant to them, yet this topic has been largely ignored by verbal lie detection researchers. Method: In the present experiment participants watched a video recording of a secret meeting between three people. Truth tellers were instructed to recall the meeting truthfully, and lie tellers were instructed to pretend that one person (John) was not there. Participants were or were not exposed to a Model Statement during the interview. The dependent variables were ‘total details’ and ‘complications’. Results: Truth tellers reported more complications than lie tellers but lie tellers reported more details than truth tellers. The Model Statement resulted in more complications and details being reported. The Veracity x Model Statement interaction effect was not significant. In terms of self-reported strategies, the main veracity difference was that truth tellers were more inclined to ‘be detailed” than lie tellers. Discussion: We discuss the atypical finding (most details reported by lie tellers) and ideas for future research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2023a1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2023a1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景/目的:从业者经常告诉我们,通过遗漏信息来撒谎与他们有关,然而这个话题在很大程度上被言语测谎研究人员忽视了。方法:在本实验中,参与者观看了三个人秘密会面的录像。说真话的人被要求如实回忆那次会面,说假话的人被要求假装有一个人(约翰)不在场。在访谈中,参与者有或没有接触到示范陈述。因变量是“总细节”和“并发症”。结果:说真话的人比说假话的人报告的并发症更多,但说假话的人比说真话的人报告的细节更多。示范声明导致报告更加复杂和细节。准确性与模型语句交互效应不显著。就自我报告策略而言,主要的真实性差异在于,说真话的人比说假话的人更倾向于“详细”。讨论:我们讨论非典型的发现(大部分细节由说谎者报告)和未来研究的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Verbal Cues to Deceit when Lying through Omitting Information: Examining the Effect of a Model Statement Interview Protocol
Background/objectives: Practitioners frequently inform us that lying through omitting information is relevant to them, yet this topic has been largely ignored by verbal lie detection researchers. Method: In the present experiment participants watched a video recording of a secret meeting between three people. Truth tellers were instructed to recall the meeting truthfully, and lie tellers were instructed to pretend that one person (John) was not there. Participants were or were not exposed to a Model Statement during the interview. The dependent variables were ‘total details’ and ‘complications’. Results: Truth tellers reported more complications than lie tellers but lie tellers reported more details than truth tellers. The Model Statement resulted in more complications and details being reported. The Veracity x Model Statement interaction effect was not significant. In terms of self-reported strategies, the main veracity difference was that truth tellers were more inclined to ‘be detailed” than lie tellers. Discussion: We discuss the atypical finding (most details reported by lie tellers) and ideas for future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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