Detecting Deceptive Communication From Verbal, Visual, and Paralinguistic Cues1
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2269294 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John E Hocking (Michigan State University), Edmund P Kaminski (Michigan State University), Joyce Ellyn Bauchner (Michigan State University), Joyce Bauchner, Gerald R Miller (0009-0002-2561-3535, Michigan State University) |
| Year | 1979 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 33-46 |
| Publication date | 1979-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Human Communication Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0360-3989 • E-ISSN: 1468-2958 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1979.tb00289.x |
| OpenAlex | W2085189904 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 25 |
| References cited | 17 |
This experiment examined how differences in the verbal and nonverbal behaviors available to persons influenced their accuracy in detecting deceptive communication. Earlier research found that when the context of the lying involved the concealment of emotional responses, observers were more accurate when they observed persons' bodies only than when they observed their heads. The present experiment extends this research by: (1) examining observer accuracy in a situation in which persons made true or false statements about a factual event, in addition to replicating the situation in which they concealed their emotional responses; and (2) presenting observers with additional categories of information, both in isolation and in combinations, and comparing resulting accuracy differences. Both types of dishonest behavior were viewed by 719 observers in one of 14 experimental conditions. They saw either color or black-and-white videotapes, which showed either a close-up of the person's face, a shot of the body only, or a shot of the head and body. Half of the observers viewed the stimuli without audio and half were allowed to hear the audio. These variables created a 3 (shot) by 2 (color/black-and-white) by 2 (visual only/audio and visual) factorial design. Audio-only and transcript conditions make up the final two cells. When the lying behavior involved the concealment of emotional responses, results replicated the earlier head-body finding. When it involved a factual event, observers who viewed the heads were more accurate than those who viewed the bodies
Cognitive psychology · Context (archaeology · Event (particle physics · Kinesics · Lying · Nonverbal communication · Observer (physics · Paralanguage · Authorship Attribution and Profiling · Communication · Deception detection and forensic psychology · Psychology · Social Psychology · Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Differences in human ability to judge veracity from the audio medium
Individual differences in judging deception
Scientific jury selection.
Verbal and Nonverbal Communication of Deception
Explanations for visual cue primacy in judgments of honesty and deceit
Listening, not watching
Individual differences and cues to deception
Accuracy in Detecting Deception
Deception
Interpersonal Deception Theory
Testing Interpersonal Deception Theory
Testing Interpersonal Deception Theory
Interpersonal deception
Nonverbal communication and deception
Broadening the deception construct
The Nature of Arousal and Nonverbal Indices
Invited Article Fudging with Friends and Lying to Lovers
Cognitive Biases and Nonverbal Cue Availability in Detecting Deception
Changing Conceptions of "Message Effects" A 24-Year Overview
Deception and Arousal
Planning and Control of Behavior During Deception
Self-Monitoring, Rehearsal, and Deceptive Communication
Prepared Lies, Spontaneous Lies, Machiavellianism, and Nonverbal Communication
Detecting Deception
The Truth-Deception Attribution
Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception †
A History of Lie Detection
Telling It Like It Isn't
The Manipulation of Human Behavior
The Ability to Judge Truth-Telling, or Lying, From the Voice as Transmitted Over a Public Address System
Detecting deception from the body or face
Physiological measures and the detection of deception
An Exploration of Deception as a Communication Construct
| Unique citing works | 25 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,53 |
| Citation span | 1979 - 2011 (33) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 23 |