Policemen’s and Civilians’ Beliefs About Facial Cues of Deception

An Honest Joker reveals stereotypical beliefs about the face of deception

Research on deception detection has mainly focused on Simple Deception, in which false information is presented as true. Relatively few studies have examined Sophisticated Deception, in which true information is presented as false. Because Sophisticated Deception incentivizes the appearance of dishonesty, it provides a window onto stereotypical beliefs about cues to deception. Here, we adapted the popular Joker Game to elicit spontaneous facial expressions under Simple Deception, Sophisticated Deception, and Plain Truth conditions, comparing facial behaviors in static, dynamic nonspeaking, and dynamic speaking presentations. Facial behaviors were analysed via machine learning using the Facial Action Coding System. Facial activations were more intense and longer lasting in the Sophisticated Deception condition than in the Simple Deception and Plain Truth conditions. More facial action units intensified in the static condition than in the dynamic speaking condition. Simple Deception involved leaked facial behaviors of which deceivers were unaware. In contrast, Sophisticated Deception involved deliberately leaked facial cues, including stereotypical cues to lying (e.g., gaze aversion). These stereotypes were inaccurate in the sense that they diverged from cues in the Simple Deception condition-the actual appearance of deception in this task. Our findings show that different modes of deception can be distinguished via facial action analysis. They also show that stereotypical beliefs concerning cues to deception can inform behavior. To facilitate future research on these topics, the multimodal stimuli developed in this study are available free for scientific use.

Individual differences in self-reported lie detection abilities

Previous literature on lie detection abilities bears an interesting paradox. On the group level, people detect others' lies at guessing level. However, when asked to evaluate their own abilities, people report being able to detect lies (i.e., self-reported lie detection). Understanding this paradox is important because decisions which rely on credibility assessment and deception detection can have serious implications (e.g., trust in others, legal issues). In two online studies, we tested whether individual differences account for variance in self-reported lie detection abilities. We assessed personality traits (Big-Six personality traits, Dark Triad), empathy, emotional intelligence, cultural values, trust level, social desirability, and belief in one's own lie detection abilities. In both studies, mean self-reported lie detection abilities were above chance level. Then, lower out-group trust and higher social desirability levels predicted higher self-reported lie detection abilities. These results suggest that social trust and norms shape our beliefs about our own lie detection abilities.

Autistic Adults May Be Erroneously Perceived as Deceptive and Lacking Credibility

We hypothesized that autistic adults may be erroneously judged as deceptive or lacking credibility due to demonstrating unexpected and atypical behaviors. Thirty autistic and 29 neurotypical individuals participated in video-recorded interviews, and we measured their demonstration of gaze aversion, repetitive body movements, literal interpretation of figurative language, poor reciprocity, and flat affect. Participants (N = 1410) viewed one of these videos and rated their perception of the individual's truthfulness or credibility. The hypothesis was partially supported, with autistic individuals perceived as more deceptive and less credible than neurotypical individuals when telling the truth. However, this relationship was not influenced by the presence of any of the target behaviors, but instead, by the individual's overall presentation.