COMM 415 1st Edition Lecture 21 Outline of Last Lecture I. gene transcription Outline of Current Lecture II. DeceptionCurrent LectureDeceptionDeception: an act intended to foster in another, a belief that the deceiver considers falseKey to deceptive comm: conscious deliberate intent-deception has a dual nature: communication of specific info, and metacommunication about the truth value of contentDeception cues: info that gives away the falsehoodLeakage cues: info that gives away the true infoEx: slip of the tongueCue competition: when the verbal and nonverbal signs carry implications that are at oddsDetection apprehension: the fear of being caught telling a lieThe Othello Error: occurs when a lie catcher fails to consider that a truthful person who is under stress many appear to be lying; truthful people may be afraid of beingdisbelievedUnderlying Emotional FactorsFear: (detection apprehension)Guilt: (deception guilt)Excitement: (“duping delight”)***most lies fail due to either inadequate preparation or the interference of emotionsThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.Theoretical Approaches to DeceptionAttempted control: being excessively rehearsedArousal: when we lie, many people start sweating, shaking, etc.Affect: emotion -cues that there are additional emotional states that don’t really ad to the messageEx: “Are these your drugs?”“No”“Then why do you look nervous?”Cognitive load: a lot harder on your brain mentally to actually think up and keep going with a lieHumans Are Poor Lie DetectorsStudy: reviewed 40 studies-67% accuracy rate for detecting truths-44% accuracy rate for detecting lies-high accuracy for truth, low accuracy for lies=”truth bias”-we assume people are automatically telling the truthStudy #2: results from 206 reports and 24,483 judges-people achieve an average of 54% correct lie-truth judgements-correctly classifying 47% of lies as deceptive and 61% of truths as nondeceptiveStudy #3: REVIEWED 142 STUDIES-19,801 judges-mean accuracy of 54.05% in discriminating lies from truths-mean of 55.5% accuracy for truth judgments***people do not do much better than chance at detecting deception-people typically report extremely high confidence in their detection ability; this is misplaced confidenceHow Good Are the Pros? Study-students were interviewed twice by uniformed police officers-in both interviews they denied that they had a pair of headphones, when in fact they really did in one of the interviews-360 police detectives -accuracy rates were very low***in the best condition, police performed at 60%-their confidence in detecting deception was high-the correlation between their confidence and actual ability to detect deception was r=.04 (virtually 0)Why Humans Are Poor Lie DetectorsStudy: people are especially likely to judge familiar vs unfamiliar persons as truthful-my partner has been honest in the past, therefore they are being truthful now-truth biasDetecting Deception in Children Study-induced 3 to 7 year olds to lie: “temptation resistance paradigm”-college students watched video-taped interrogation-3 to 7 year olds have not fully developed their deception skills-however, judges could not accurately detect the liars based on nonverbal cuesIs Anyone Good at Detecting Lies? Study-there is no compelling evidence that some people are good at detecting lies and others are not good at it-the standard deviation in judges’ detection abilities is only 1%-someone at the 86th percentile of detection ability is only 1% better than someone at the 16th percentile.Why Are Humans Poor Lie Detectors? 1. Lack of motivation to catch liars-no one wants paranoia all the time 2. absence of Pinocchio’s nose-no one dead giveaway that you are being lied to 3. countermeasures-When people are in the act of lying, they know they are lying and challenge your disbeliefs and skepticism 4. embedded lies-some lies are embedded in truths, only one key point is twisted 5. no adequate feedback-don’t give feedback about how you are detecting the lies or how they are lying to you 6. violates conversational rules-not getting in their face about how they are lying to you, socially awkward 7. good liarsCommon Errors in Lie Detection-examining the wrong cues-overemphasis on nonverbal cues-the Othello Error-use of heuristics-neglect of interpersonal differences: big one-differences between people-overconfidence in lie detection skillsApril 16, 2015Findings on Cues to Deception Study-the following are significantly associated with deception:1. providing fewer details2. making less sense3. internal discrepancies: fact that contradicts another fact4. repetitions5. less verbal/vocal involvement6. fewer illustrators7. less verbal immediacy8. pupil dilation: good sign of physiological arousal9. increased vocal pitchThe Following are NOT associated with deception:1. Response duration2. Eye contact3. Speech disturbances4. Smiling5. Silent pauses6. Head nod7. Response latency8. Shrugs9. Shifting posture10. Speech rate11. Foot and leg movements12. Self-fidgetingDetecting Deceptive Communication Study-73 nurses watched video-they were interviewed and had to tell the truth about video and lie about the videoLiars: fewer illustrators, hand movements, more ah-speech disturbances, and longer response latencies than truth tellers-using these 4 nonverbal behaviors, 71% of truth tellers and 85% of liars were correctly classifiedUse of nonverbal cues in children Study-starts around 4-children correctly guessed location of hidden toy using gaze of a lying confederate-7-9 year old children are more likely to avert gaze while lying-not so with 11 year olds to adultsDominanceBehaviors that are associated with dominance:1. Persuasion2. Feedback and reinforcement3. Deception4. Impression managementThe Dominance Ratio-% looking while speaking divided by % of looking while listening-ROTC officers have dominance ratio = 1-ROTC cadets have dominance ration less than 1-would look more while listening than speaking***when people’s relative status in a convo changes, their dominance ratio changesDominance and Status-Confederate introduced as high school senior who did not want to go to college and who hoped to get a job in a gas station-Or a senior college chem honor student already accepted into a good medical school-Discuss 3 interpersonal dilemans” come up