Suppr超能文献

意大利语言语中的欺骗标记。

Markers of deception in italian speech.

机构信息

Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2012 Oct 30;3:453. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00453. eCollection 2012.

Abstract

Lying is a universal activity and the detection of lying a universal concern. Presently, there is great interest in determining objective measures of deception. The examination of speech, in particular, holds promise in this regard; yet, most of what we know about the relationship between speech and lying is based on the assessment of English speaking participants. Few studies have examined indicators of deception in languages other than English. The world's languages differ in significant ways, and cross-linguistic studies of deceptive communications are a research imperative. Here we review some of these differences amongst the world's languages, and provide an overview of a number of recent studies demonstrating that cross-linguistic research is a worthwhile endeavor. In addition, we report the results of an empirical investigation of pitch, response latency, and speech rate as cues to deception in Italian speech. True and false opinions were elicited in an audio-taped interview. A within-subjects analysis revealed no significant difference between the average pitch of the two conditions; however, speech rate was significantly slower, while response latency was longer, during deception compared with truth-telling. We explore the implications of these findings and propose directions for future research, with the aim of expanding the cross-linguistic branch of research on markers of deception.

摘要

说谎是一种普遍的行为,而对说谎的检测也是普遍关注的问题。目前,人们对确定欺骗的客观测量方法非常感兴趣。在这方面,对言语的检查尤其有希望;然而,我们对言语和说谎之间的关系的了解大多是基于对说英语的参与者的评估。很少有研究检查过除英语以外的语言中的欺骗指标。世界上的语言在很多方面都有很大的不同,因此对欺骗性交流进行跨语言研究是一项研究的当务之急。在这里,我们回顾了世界上语言之间的一些差异,并概述了一些最近的研究,这些研究表明,跨语言研究是一项有价值的努力。此外,我们还报告了一项关于意大利语语音中的音高、反应时和语速作为欺骗线索的实证研究的结果。在录音采访中引出了真实和虚假的意见。一项被试内分析显示,两种条件下的平均音高没有显著差异;然而,与说实话相比,说谎时的语速明显较慢,而反应时较长。我们探讨了这些发现的意义,并提出了未来研究的方向,旨在扩大欺骗标记的跨语言研究分支。

相似文献

1
Markers of deception in italian speech.
Front Psychol. 2012 Oct 30;3:453. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00453. eCollection 2012.
2
Analysing Deception in Witness Memory through Linguistic Styles in Spontaneous Language.
Brain Sci. 2023 Feb 13;13(2):317. doi: 10.3390/brainsci13020317.
3
Truth or lie: Exploring the language of deception.
PLoS One. 2023 Feb 2;18(2):e0281179. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281179. eCollection 2023.
4
Detecting spontaneous deception in the brain.
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Jul;43(10):3257-3269. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25849. Epub 2022 Mar 28.
5
Pitch changes during attempted deception.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1977 May;35(5):345-50. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.35.5.345.
6
Deceptive Intentions: Can Cues to Deception Be Measured before a Lie Is Even Stated?
PLoS One. 2015 May 27;10(5):e0125237. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125237. eCollection 2015.
7
Detecting suspicious behaviour using speech: acoustic correlates of deceptive speech -- an exploratory investigation.
Appl Ergon. 2013 Sep;44(5):694-702. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2012.04.016. Epub 2012 Jul 28.
8
Speech cues to deception in bilinguals.
Appl Psycholinguist. 2020 Sep;41(5):993-1015. doi: 10.1017/s0142716420000326. Epub 2020 Jul 24.
10
The cognitive mechanisms underlying deception: an event-related potential study.
Int J Psychophysiol. 2015 Mar;95(3):395-405. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.01.010. Epub 2015 Feb 3.

引用本文的文献

2
The Presence of 'Um' as a Marker of Truthfulness in the Speech of TV Personalities.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2016 Dec 6;24(4):549-560. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2016.1256018. eCollection 2017.
4
Lying in a native and foreign language.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2015 Aug;22(4):1124-9. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0781-4.
5
Deception research today.
Front Psychol. 2014 Mar 25;5:256. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00256. eCollection 2014.

本文引用的文献

1
Deception detection from written accounts.
Scand J Psychol. 2012 Apr;53(2):103-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00931.x. Epub 2011 Dec 19.
2
Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments.
Psychol Bull. 2011 Jul;137(4):643-59. doi: 10.1037/a0023589.
3
A WORLD OF LIES.
J Cross Cult Psychol. 2006 Jan;37(1):60-74. doi: 10.1177/0022022105282295.
4
Detecting deception: the scope and limits.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Feb;12(2):48-53. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.11.008.
5
The cognition of deception: the role of executive processes in producing lies.
Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr. 2006 Aug;132(3):197-214. doi: 10.3200/mono.132.3.197-214.
6
Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: the benefit of recalling an event in reverse order.
Law Hum Behav. 2008 Jun;32(3):253-65. doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9103-y. Epub 2007 Aug 13.
7
Psychopathy and nonverbal indicators of deception in offenders.
Law Hum Behav. 2007 Aug;31(4):337-51. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9063-7. Epub 2006 Oct 21.
8
Accuracy of deception judgments.
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006;10(3):214-34. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2.
9
Lying words: predicting deception from linguistic styles.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003 May;29(5):665-75. doi: 10.1177/0146167203029005010.
10
Appearing truthful generalizes across different deception situations.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 Mar;86(3):486-95. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.486.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验