Department of Psychology.
Ross School of Business.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2019 Sep;117(3):560-578. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000175. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
Humans consistently face the challenge of discerning liars from truth-tellers. Hundreds of studies in which observers judge the veracity of laboratory-created lies and truths suggest that this is a difficult task; in this context, lie-detection accuracy is notoriously poor. Challenging these findings and traditional methodologies in lie-detection research, we draw upon the somatic marker hypothesis and research on interoception to find that: (a) people experience physiological reactions indicating increased sympathetic arousal while observing real, high-stakes lies (vs. truths), and (b) attending to these physiological reactions may improve lie-detection accuracy. Consistent with the participants demonstrated more physiological arousal and vasoconstriction while observing real crime liars versus truth-tellers, but not mock crime liars versus truth-tellers (Experiment 1; = 48). Experiment 2 replicated this effect in a larger sample of participants ( = 169). Experiment 3 generalized this effect to a novel set of stimuli; participants demonstrated more physiological arousal to game show contestants who lied (vs. told the truth) about their intention to cooperate in a high-stakes economic game ( = 71). In an intervention study (Experiment 4; = 428), participants were trained to attend to their physiological signals; lie-detection accuracy increased relative to a control condition. Experiment 5 (N = 354) replicated this effect, and the addition of a bogus training condition suggested that increased accuracy was not simply attributable to self-focused attention. Findings highlight the limitations of relying on laboratory-created lies to study human lie-detection and suggest that observers have automatic, physiological reactions to being deceived. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
人类一直在努力识别说谎者和说真话者。数百项研究表明，观察者判断实验室制造的谎言和真相的真实性是一项困难的任务；在这种情况下，谎言检测的准确性非常差。为了挑战这些发现和传统的谎言检测研究方法，我们借鉴了躯体标记假说和内感受研究，发现：(a) 当人们观察真实的、高风险的谎言（与事实相比）时，他们会经历表明交感神经唤醒增加的生理反应；(b) 注意这些生理反应可能会提高谎言检测的准确性。参与者在观察真实犯罪说谎者与说真话者时，表现出更多的生理唤醒和血管收缩，而不是模拟犯罪说谎者与说真话者（实验 1；n=48）。实验 2 在更大的参与者样本中复制了这一效应（n=169）。实验 3 将这一效应推广到一组新的刺激物；参与者对游戏节目参赛者表现出更多的生理唤醒，这些参赛者在一场高风险的经济游戏中对他们的合作意图撒谎（与说实话相比）（n=71）。在一项干预研究（实验 4；n=428）中，参与者被训练注意自己的生理信号；与控制条件相比，谎言检测的准确性有所提高。实验 5（n=354）复制了这一效应，并且增加了一个虚假训练条件表明，准确性的提高并不是简单地归因于自我关注。这些发现突出了依赖实验室制造的谎言来研究人类谎言检测的局限性，并表明观察者对被欺骗有自动的、生理上的反应。（PsycINFO 数据库记录（c）2019 APA，保留所有权利）。
