Cognitive Biases and Nonverbal Cue Availability in Detecting Deception

被引:77
作者
Burgoon, Judee K. [1 ]
Blair, J. Pete [2 ]
Strom, Renee E. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Arizona, Ctr Management Informat, Tucson, AZ 85719 USA
[2] SW Texas State Univ, Dept Criminal Justice, San Marcos, TX 78666 USA
[3] St Cloud State Univ, Dept Commun Studies, St Cloud, MN 56301 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00333.x
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
In potentially deceptive situations, people rely on mental shortcuts to help process information. These heuristic judgments are often biased and result in inaccurate assessments of sender veracity. Four such biases-truth bias, visual bias, demeanor bias, and expectancy violation bias-were examined in a judgment experiment that varied nonverbal cue availability and deception. Observers saw a complete videotaped interview (full access to visual, vocal, and verbal cues), heard the complete interview (vocal and verbal access), or read a transcript (verbal access) of a truthful or deceptive suspect being questioned about a mock theft and then rated the interviewee on information, behavior, and image management and truthfulness. Results supported the presence of all four biases, which were most evident when interviewees were deceptive and observers had access to all visual, vocal, and verbal modalities. Deceivers' messages were judged as increasingly complete, honest, clear, and relevant; their behavior as more involved and dominant; and their overall demeanor as more credible, with the addition of nonverbal cues. Deceivers were actually judged as more credible than truthtellers in the audiovisual modality, whereas best discrimination and detection accuracy occurred in the audio condition. Results have implications for what factors influence judgments of a sender's credibility and accuracy in distinguishing truth from deception, especially under conditions where senders are producing messages interactively.
引用
收藏
页码:572 / U94
页数:33
相关论文
共 82 条
[1]  
Afifi WA, 2004, COMMUN THEOR, V14, P167, DOI 10.1093/ct/14.2.167
[2]   Linguistic styles in deceptive communication: Dubitative ambiguity and elliptic eluding in packaged lies [J].
Anolli, L ;
Balconi, M ;
Ciceri, R .
SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 2003, 31 (07) :687-710
[3]  
[Anonymous], ANN M INT COMM ASS D
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1979, Skill in Nonverbal Communication: Individual Differences
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2003, Communication Reports
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1979, Human Communication Research
[7]   The effect of presentation modality on judgments of honesty and attractiveness [J].
Atoum, AO ;
Al-Simadi, FA .
SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 2000, 28 (03) :269-278
[8]  
BAUCHNER JE, 1980, HUMAN COMMUNICATION, V6, P251
[9]   FISHY-LOOKING LIARS - DECEPTION JUDGMENT FROM EXPECTANCY VIOLATION [J].
BOND, CF ;
OMAR, A ;
PITRE, U ;
LASHLEY, BR ;
SKAGGS, LM ;
KIRK, CT .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1992, 63 (06) :969-977
[10]   THE MISCOMMUNICATION OF DECEPTION - AN ADAPTIVE PERSPECTIVE [J].
BOND, CF ;
KAHLER, KN ;
PAOLICELLI, LM .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1985, 21 (04) :331-345