• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

性别和个性特征会影响说实话或说谎所需时间的差异。

Sex and personality traits influence the difference between time taken to tell the truth or lie.

作者信息

Farrow Tom F D, Reilly Rebecca, Rahman Towhida A, Herford Amy E, Woodruff Peter W R, Spence Sean A

机构信息

Department of Academic Clinical Psychiatry, University of Sheffield, The Longley Centre, Northern General Hospital, UK.

出版信息

Percept Mot Skills. 2003 Oct;97(2):451-60. doi: 10.2466/pms.2003.97.2.451.

DOI:10.2466/pms.2003.97.2.451
PMID:14620232
Abstract

A necessary component of lying is the withholding of a truthful response. Hence, lying may be conceptualised as involving the inhibition of an initial, automatic response (the truth) while an alternative response (the lie) is generated. We investigated response times to visually and auditorially presented questions probing recent episodic memory, when subjects answered questions truthfully or with lies. We also investigated whether the absolute response times or difference between time taken to tell the truth or lie was affected by participants' sex or correlated with personality scores on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Short Scale. 61 subjects answered the same 36 questions five times. The first time involved answering all questions truthfully, which allowed post hoc analysis of whether subjects had been consistent in their lying and truth-telling on the following four occasions. These latter four occasions involved answering all questions (one each with 'truth' or 'lie') for both types of presentation. Regardless of type of presentation or subjects' sex, subjects took approximately 200 msec. longer to lie than to tell the truth in response to each question (p<.001). There were significant correlations between truthful response times to auditorially presented questions and Eysenck 'Neuroticism' scores. There was also a significant correlation for women between mean individual lie-minus-truth time to auditorially presented questions and Eysenck 'Lie' scores. These preliminary data suggest that response time is systematically longer when telling a lie and that personality variables may play a part in this process.

摘要

说谎的一个必要组成部分是隐瞒真实的回答。因此,说谎可以被概念化为涉及抑制最初的自动反应(真相),同时生成另一种反应(谎言)。我们研究了受试者在如实回答或说谎时,对视觉和听觉呈现的探测近期情景记忆的问题的反应时间。我们还研究了绝对反应时间或说实话与说谎所用时间的差异是否受参与者性别的影响,或者是否与艾森克人格问卷修订版简式量表上的人格得分相关。61名受试者对同样的36个问题回答了五次。第一次是如实回答所有问题,这使得可以对受试者在接下来的四次回答中说谎和说实话是否一致进行事后分析。后四次回答涉及针对两种呈现方式回答所有问题(每种呈现方式各有一个“实话”或“谎言”问题)。无论呈现方式或受试者性别如何,受试者对每个问题说谎的时间比对说实话的时间大约长200毫秒(p<0.001)。对听觉呈现问题的如实回答时间与艾森克“神经质”得分之间存在显著相关性。对于女性,听觉呈现问题的平均个人说谎减去说实话时间与艾森克“说谎”得分之间也存在显著相关性。这些初步数据表明,说谎时反应时间会系统性地更长,而且人格变量可能在这个过程中起作用。

相似文献

1
Sex and personality traits influence the difference between time taken to tell the truth or lie.性别和个性特征会影响说实话或说谎所需时间的差异。
Percept Mot Skills. 2003 Oct;97(2):451-60. doi: 10.2466/pms.2003.97.2.451.
2
An empirical test of the decision to lie component of the Activation-Decision-Construction-Action Theory (ADCAT).对激活-决策-构建-行动理论(ADCAT)中说谎决策部分的实证检验。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2016 Sep;169:45-55. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.004. Epub 2016 May 22.
3
Telling lies: the irrepressible truth?说谎:无法抑制的真相?
PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e60713. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060713. Epub 2013 Apr 3.
4
Suppressing the truth as a mechanism of deception: Delta plots reveal the role of response inhibition in lying.将隐瞒真相作为一种欺骗手段:德尔塔图揭示了反应抑制在说谎中的作用。
Conscious Cogn. 2015 Dec;37:148-59. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2015.09.005. Epub 2015 Sep 19.
5
A functional MRI study of deception among offenders with antisocial personality disorders.欺骗行为的功能性磁共振成像研究:反社会人格障碍者。
Neuroscience. 2013 Aug 6;244:90-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.03.055. Epub 2013 Apr 9.
6
Brain mapping of deception and truth telling about an ecologically valid situation: functional MR imaging and polygraph investigation--initial experience.关于真实情境下欺骗与说实话的脑图谱研究:功能磁共振成像与测谎仪调查——初步经验
Radiology. 2006 Feb;238(2):679-88. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2382050237.
7
Lying relies on the truth.谎言依赖于真相。
Cognition. 2014 Sep;132(3):324-34. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.04.009. Epub 2014 May 22.
8
Eysenck personality inventory: impulsivity/neuroticism and social desirability response set.艾森克人格问卷:冲动性/神经质与社会赞许性反应定势
Psychol Rep. 1996 Feb;78(1):35-40. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.1.35.
9
Generating lies produces lower memory predictions and higher memory performance than telling the truth: Evidence for a metacognitive illusion.编造谎言比说实话产生更低的记忆预测和更高的记忆表现:元认知错觉的证据。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Mar;44(3):465-484. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000459. Epub 2017 Sep 21.
10
Evidence of mnemonic ability selectively affecting truthful and deceptive response dynamics.记忆能力选择性影响真实和欺骗性反应动态的证据。
Am J Psychol. 2010 Winter;123(4):447-53. doi: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.123.4.0447.

引用本文的文献

1
Unfolding the spatial and temporal neural processing of lying about face familiarity.揭示关于面孔熟悉度说谎的时空神经处理过程。
Cereb Cortex. 2015 Apr;25(4):927-36. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht284. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
2
I want to lie about not knowing you, but my precuneus refuses to cooperate.我想谎称不认识你,但我的楔前叶却不听使唤。
Sci Rep. 2013;3:1636. doi: 10.1038/srep01636.
3
Modulation of untruthful responses with non-invasive brain stimulation.非侵入性脑刺激对不诚实反应的调制。
Front Psychiatry. 2013 Feb 26;3:97. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00097. eCollection 2012.
4
Identification and classification of facial familiarity in directed lying: an ERP study.定向说谎中面孔熟悉性的识别与分类:一项 ERP 研究。
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031250. Epub 2012 Feb 21.
5
A cognitive neurobiological account of deception: evidence from functional neuroimaging.欺骗的认知神经生物学阐释:来自功能神经成像的证据
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004 Nov 29;359(1451):1755-62. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1555.