Distinct programs of research have investigated deception detection accuracy and the prevalence of lying. Further, prior deception detection experiments typically confound sender and receiver effects. The current experiment (N = 100) sought both to di...
Distinct programs of research have investigated deception detection accuracy and the prevalence of lying. Further, prior deception detection experiments typically confound sender and receiver effects. The current experiment (N = 100) sought both to disentangle sender and receiver effects examining anticipated associations between reported lie prevalence and sender and receiver effects: sender transparency, sender demeanor, receiver ability, and receiver truth-bias. Three hypotheses were tested. It was expected that poor liars would report lying less frequently. The second hypothesis predicted that senders with honest demeanors would report lying with greater frequency. Third, it was anticipated that participants who reported lying more frequently would be less truth-biased. All participants self-reported how often they lied and how often they believed they were lied to. Participants then took part in a round robin deception detection task where each participant was both a sender and a received. Scores were created for how often each participant was believed (honest demeanor), correctly detected (transparency), believed others (truth-bias), and correctly detected others (receiver ability / accuracy). The data were not consistent with the associations predicted by three hypotheses, but the deception false consensus effect was replicated. Participants who reported lying more frequently reported being lied to more often. The results are compared with prior findings. Future research should investigate why the deception false consensus effect does not lead to greater truth-bias. Additional research is needed to explain across-study differences in variability in sender transparency, sender demeanor, receiver ability, and receiver truth-bias.