Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Psychology

Editor-in-Chief: Kiefer, Markus

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2543-8883
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Truth or Tale? How Construal Level and Judgment Mode Affect Confidence and Accuracy in Deception Detection

Mariela E. Jaffé / Marc-Andre Reinhard / Karl Ask / Rainer Greifeneder
Published Online: 2018-09-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psych-2018-0002

Abstract

Previous research has indicated that individuals typically perform quite poorly in discerning truths from lies, and that confidence in judged veracity is not predictive of objective accuracy. In this experiment, we investigated the joint influence of construal level and judgment mode on detection accuracy and confidence. Participants (N = 161) watched eight videotaped true and false statements while adopting a high or low level of construal, and received instructions to detect the deceptiveness of the statements either before (online judgments) or after (offline judgments) watching the videos. Contrary to our predictions, construal level and judgment mode did not influence detection accuracy independently or interactively. However, low level participants were less confident when making judgments offline as opposed to online, whereas the confidence of high level participants was unaffected by judgment mode. Implications for deception detection research and practice are discussed.

Keywords: Truth and lie detection; judgment mode; construal level theory

References

  • Aamondt, M. G., & Custer, H. (2006). Who can best catch a liar? A meta-analysis of individual differences in detecting deception. The Forensic Examiner, 15, 6-11.Google Scholar

  • Akehurst, L., Kohnken, G., Vrij, A., & Bull, R. (1996). Lay persons’ and police officers’ beliefs regarding deceptive behaviour. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 461-471. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Zemla, J. C. (2010). Missing the trees for the forest: A construal level account of the illusion of explanatory depth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 436-451. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Amit, E., Algom, D., & Trope, Y. (2009). Distance-dependent processing of pictures and words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 400-415. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bless, H., & Burger, A. M. (2016). A closer look at social psychologists’ silver bullet: Inevitable and evitable side effects of the experimental approach. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 296-308. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bless, H., & Forgas, J. P. (2000). The message within: Toward a social psychology of subjective experiences. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior (pp. 372-392). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

  • Bond, C. F. J., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214-234. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Braga, J. N., Ferreira, M. B., & Sherman, S. J. (2015). The effects of construal level on heuristic reasoning: The case of representativeness and availability. Decision, 2, 216-227. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bull, R. (2004). Training to detect deception from behavioural cues: Attempts and problems. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), The detection of deception in forensic contexts (pp. 251-268). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Crum, A. J., Corbin, W. R., Brownell, K. D., & Salovey, P. (2011). Mind over milkshakes: Mindsets, not just nutrients, determine ghrelin response. Health Psychology, 30, 424-429. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DePaulo, B. M., Charlton, K., Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., & Muhlenbruck, L. (1997). The accuracy-confidence correlation in the detection of deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 346-357. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74-118. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dijksterhuis, A., & Nordgren, L. F. (2006). A theory of unconscious thought. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 95-109. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral , and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, J., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). How global versus local processing fits regulatory focus. Psychological Science, 16, 631-636. doi:CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Fukukura, J., Ferguson, M. J., & Fujita, K. (2013). Psychological distance can improve decision making under information overload via gist memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 658-665. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2010). Truth from language and truth from fit: The impact of linguistic concreteness and level of construal on subjective truth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1576-1588. doi:CrossrefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Hartwig, M., & Bond, C. F. J. (2011). Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 643-659. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgement depends on whether the judgement task is memory-based or on-line. Psychology Review, 93, 258-268. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217-1230. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kelley, C. M., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Remembering mistaken for knowing: Ease of retrieval as a basis for confidence in answers to general knowledge questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 1-24. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Langer, E., Djikic, M., Pirson, M., Madenci, A., & Donohue, R. (2010). Believing is seeing: Using mindlessness (mindfully) to improve visual acuity. Psychological Science, 21, 661-666. doi:CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, A. Y., Keller, P. A., & Sternthal, B. (2010). Value from regulatory construal fit: The persuasive impact of fit between consumer goals and message concreteness. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 735-747. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 5-18. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). The psychology of transcending the here and now. Science, 322, 1201-1205. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Moi, W. Y., & Shanks, D. R. (2015). Can lies be detected unconsciously? Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-10. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111-163. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reinhard, M.-A. (2010). Need for Cognition and the process of lie detection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 961-971. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reinhard, M.-A., Greifeneder, R., & Scharmach, M. (2013). Unconscious processes improve lie detection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 721-739. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reinhard, M.-A., Sporer, S. L., & Scharmach, M. (2013). Perceived familiarity with a judgmental situation improves lie detection ability. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 72, 43-52. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 1-75. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rim, S., Amit, E., Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Halbeisen, G., & Algom, D. (2015). How words transcend and pictures immerse: On the association between medium and level of construal. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 123-130. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Speckman, P. L., & Province, J. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56, 356-374. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Shani, Y., Igou, E. R., & Zeelenberg, M. (2009). Different ways of looking at unpleasant truths: How construal levels influence information search. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 36-44. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Stoate, I., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012). Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30, 815-823. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Street, C. N. H., Bischof, W. F., Vadillo, M. A., & Kingstone, A. (2016). Inferring others’ hidden thoughts: Smart guesses in a low diagnostic world. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 539-549. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Street, C. N. H., & Vadillo, M. A. (2016). Can the unconscious boost lie-detection accuracy? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 246-250. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440-463. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 660-671. doi:CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vrij, A. (2004). Guidelines to catch a liar. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strömwall (Eds.), The detection of deception in forensic contexts (pp. 287-316). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). West Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley.Google Scholar

  • Yan, D., Sengupta, J., & Hong, J. (2016). Why does psychological distance influence construal level? The role of processing mode. Journal of Consumer Research, 43, 598-613. doi:CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

About the article

Received: 2018-01-30

Accepted: 2018-06-25

Published Online: 2018-09-01


Citation Information: Open Psychology, Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages 12–24, ISSN (Online) 2543-8883, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psych-2018-0002.

Export Citation

© by Mariela E. Jaffé et al., published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. BY-NC-ND 4.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in