政治中的欺骗检测:选民能分辨出政治家在撒谎吗?

IF 3.3 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Kyle Mattes, Valeriia Popova, Jacqueline R Evans
{"title":"政治中的欺骗检测:选民能分辨出政治家在撒谎吗?","authors":"Kyle Mattes,&nbsp;Valeriia Popova,&nbsp;Jacqueline R Evans","doi":"10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this study, we investigate voters' unaided perceptions of whether politicians are lying. We conduct an experiment in which participants attempt to uncover politicians' dishonesty by watching videos of their speeches. We find that verbal cues (specifically, the amount of detail in the speech) and general demeanor cues explain the success (failure) of veracity judgments far better than paraverbal and nonverbal cues. We also find evidence of a truth bias-people are more likely to judge statements to be true than false-despite the political setting, where voters might have been more skeptical. However, gender plays a deterministic role for veracity judgments in political context; female politicians are more likely to be judged as honest.</p>","PeriodicalId":48166,"journal":{"name":"Political Behavior","volume":"45 1","pages":"395-418"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deception Detection in Politics: Can Voters Tell When Politicians are Lying?\",\"authors\":\"Kyle Mattes,&nbsp;Valeriia Popova,&nbsp;Jacqueline R Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In this study, we investigate voters' unaided perceptions of whether politicians are lying. We conduct an experiment in which participants attempt to uncover politicians' dishonesty by watching videos of their speeches. We find that verbal cues (specifically, the amount of detail in the speech) and general demeanor cues explain the success (failure) of veracity judgments far better than paraverbal and nonverbal cues. We also find evidence of a truth bias-people are more likely to judge statements to be true than false-despite the political setting, where voters might have been more skeptical. However, gender plays a deterministic role for veracity judgments in political context; female politicians are more likely to be judged as honest.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Behavior\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"395-418\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09747-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在这项研究中,我们调查了选民对政治家是否撒谎的独立看法。我们进行了一个实验,参与者试图通过观看政客的演讲视频来揭露他们的不诚实。我们发现语言线索(特别是演讲中的细节量)和一般行为线索比语言旁线索和非语言线索更能解释准确性判断的成功(失败)。我们还发现了真相偏见的证据——人们更有可能判断陈述是真的,而不是假的——尽管在政治背景下,选民可能更持怀疑态度。然而,性别对政治语境下的真实性判断起决定性作用;女性政治家更有可能被认为诚实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Deception Detection in Politics: Can Voters Tell When Politicians are Lying?

Deception Detection in Politics: Can Voters Tell When Politicians are Lying?

Deception Detection in Politics: Can Voters Tell When Politicians are Lying?

In this study, we investigate voters' unaided perceptions of whether politicians are lying. We conduct an experiment in which participants attempt to uncover politicians' dishonesty by watching videos of their speeches. We find that verbal cues (specifically, the amount of detail in the speech) and general demeanor cues explain the success (failure) of veracity judgments far better than paraverbal and nonverbal cues. We also find evidence of a truth bias-people are more likely to judge statements to be true than false-despite the political setting, where voters might have been more skeptical. However, gender plays a deterministic role for veracity judgments in political context; female politicians are more likely to be judged as honest.

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
Political Behavior
Political Behavior POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Political Behavior publishes original research in the general fields of political behavior, institutions, processes, and policies. Approaches include economic (preference structuring, bargaining), psychological (attitude formation and change, motivations, perceptions), sociological (roles, group, class), or political (decision making, coalitions, influence). Articles focus on the political behavior (conventional or unconventional) of the individual person or small group (microanalysis), or of large organizations that participate in the political process such as parties, interest groups, political action committees, governmental agencies, and mass media (macroanalysis). As an interdisciplinary journal, Political Behavior integrates various approaches across different levels of theoretical abstraction and empirical domain (contextual analysis). Officially cited as: Polit Behav
×
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