![]() ![]() Lacking good lie detectors, a growing body of evidence indicates that the accuracy of detecting deception depends more on the characteristics of the liar and less on the lie detection ability of the judge. In fact, the accuracy rates vary around chance level. This study provides a starting point for future research exploring the meta-cognitions and patterns of skilled liars who may be most likely to evade detection.ĭespite the importance of being able to detect deception, research has consistently found that people are unable to do so. We also observed that self-reported good liars highly relied on verbal strategies of deception and they most commonly reported to i) embed their lies into truthful information, ii) keep the statement clear and simple, and iii) provide a plausible account. ![]() Higher self-reported ratings of deception ability were positively correlated with self-reports of telling more lies per day, telling inconsequential lies, lying to colleagues and friends, and communicating lies via face-to-face interactions. We conducted a survey ( n = 194) to explore the association between laypeople’s self-reported ability to deceive on the one hand, and their lie prevalence, characteristics, and deception strategies in daily life on the other. Despite this finding, the lie characteristics and strategies of deception that enable good liars to evade detection are largely unknown. Meta-analytic findings indicate that the success of unmasking a deceptive interaction relies more on the performance of the liar than on that of the lie detector. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |