RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      Examining Individual D Difffferences in Deception: Reported Lie Prevalence, Truth-bias, Deception De-tection Accuracy, Believability, and Transparency = Examining Individual D Difffferences in Deception: Reported Lie Prevalence, Truth-bias, Deception De-tection Accuracy, Believability, and Transparency

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A108938488

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      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.
      번역하기

      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.

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼