Wright Whelan Clea, Wagstaff Graham F, Wheatcroft Jacqueline M
a University of Chester.
J Psychol. 2015;149(5):517-34. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2014.911140. Epub 2014 May 7.
The low ecological validity of much of the research on deception detection is a limitation recognized by researchers in the field. Consequently, the present studies investigated subjective cues to deception using the real life, high stakes situation of people making public appeals for help with missing or murdered relatives. It was expected that cues related to affect would be particularly salient in this context. Study 1 was a qualitative investigation identifying cues to deception reportedly used by people accurate at detecting deception. Studies 2 and 3 were then empirical investigations that mainly employed the cues reported in Study 1. A number of subjective cues were found to discriminate between honest and deceptive appeals, including some previously unidentified cues, and cues likely to be context-specific. Most could be categorized under the themes of authenticity of emotion, and negative and positive affective reactions to the appealer. It is concluded that some cues to deception may emerge only in real life, high stakes situations; however, it is argued that some of these may be influenced by observers' perceptions of the characteristics of offenders, rather than acts of deception per se.
该领域的研究人员认识到，许多关于欺骗检测的研究生态效度较低，这是一个局限性。因此，本研究利用人们公开呼吁寻找失踪或遇害亲属这一现实生活中的高风险情境，调查了欺骗的主观线索。预计在这种情境下，与情感相关的线索会特别突出。研究1是一项定性调查，确定了据报道能准确检测欺骗的人所使用的欺骗线索。研究2和研究3则是实证调查，主要采用了研究1中报告的线索。研究发现了一些能够区分诚实诉求和欺骗性诉求的主观线索，包括一些此前未被识别的线索，以及可能因具体情境而异的线索。大多数线索可以归类为情感真实性、对诉求者的负面和正面情感反应等主题。研究得出的结论是，一些欺骗线索可能只出现在现实生活中的高风险情境中；然而，有人认为，其中一些线索可能受到观察者对犯罪者特征的认知影响，而非欺骗行为本身的影响。
