It's the deceiver, not the receiver: No individual differences when detecting deception in a foreign and a native language

Detection of Psychopathic Traits in Emotional Faces

When meeting someone at zero acquaintance, we make assumptions about each other that encompass emotional states, personality traits, and even cognitive abilities. Evidence suggests individuals can accurately detect psychopathic personality traits in strangers based on short video clips or photographs of faces. We present an in-depth examination of this ability. In two studies, we investigated whether high psychopathy traits are perceivable and whether other traits affect ratings of psychopathic traits in the sense of a halo effect. On the perceiver's end, we additionally examined how cognitive abilities and personality traits of the responders affect these ratings. In two studies (n1 = 170 community adults from the USA, n2 = 126 students from Australia), participants rated several targets on several characteristics of psychopathy, as well as on attractiveness, masculinity, sympathy, trustworthiness, neuroticism, intelligence, and extraversion. Results show that responders were generally able to detect psychopathy. Responders generally came to a consensus in their ratings, and using profile similarity metrics, we found a weak relation between ratings of psychopathy and the targets' psychopathy level as determined by the Psychopathy Checklist: Short Version. Trait ratings, though, were influenced by the ratings of other traits like attractiveness. Finally, we found accuracy in the perception of psychopathy was positively related to fluid intelligence but unrelated to emotion perception ability.

The Good, the Bad, and the Clever: Faking Ability as a Socio-Emotional Ability?

Socio-emotional abilities have been proposed as an extension to models of intelligence, but earlier measurement approaches have either not fulfilled criteria of ability measurement or have covered only predominantly receptive abilities. We argue that faking ability-the ability to adjust responses on questionnaires to present oneself in a desired manner-is a socio-emotional ability that can broaden our understanding of these abilities and intelligence in general. To test this theory, we developed new instruments to measure the ability to fake bad (malingering) and administered them jointly with established tests of faking good ability in a general sample of n = 134. Participants also completed multiple tests of emotion perception along with tests of emotion expression posing, pain expression regulation, and working memory capacity. We found that individual differences in faking ability tests are best explained by a general factor that had a large correlation with receptive socio-emotional abilities and had a zero to medium-sized correlation with different productive socio-emotional abilities. All correlations were still small after controlling these effects for shared variance with general mental ability as indicated by tests of working memory capacity. We conclude that faking ability is indeed correlated meaningfully with other socio-emotional abilities and discuss the implications for intelligence research and applied ability assessment.

Lie prevalence, lie characteristics and strategies of self-reported good liars

Meta-analytic findings indicate that the success of unmasking a deceptive interaction relies more on the performance of the liar than on that of the lie detector. Despite this finding, the lie characteristics and strategies of deception that enable good liars to evade detection are largely unknown. We conducted a survey (n = 194) to explore the association between laypeople’s self-reported ability to deceive on the one hand, and their lie prevalence, characteristics, and deception strategies in daily life on the other. Higher self-reported ratings of deception ability were positively correlated with self-reports of telling more lies per day, telling inconsequential lies, lying to colleagues and friends, and communicating lies via face-to-face interactions. We also observed that self-reported good liars highly relied on verbal strategies of deception and they most commonly reported to i) embed their lies into truthful information, ii) keep the statement clear and simple, and iii) provide a plausible account. This study provides a starting point for future research exploring the meta-cognitions and patterns of skilled liars who may be most likely to evade detection.

Accuracy, Confidence, and Experiential Criteria for Lie Detection Through a Videotaped Interview

An individual's ability to discriminate lies from truth is far from accurate, and is poorly related to an individual's confidence in his/her detection. Both law enforcement and non-professional interviewers base their evaluations of truthfulness on experiential criteria, including emotional and expressive features, cognitive complexity, and paraverbal aspects of interviewees' reports. The current experimental study adopted two perspectives of investigation: the first is aimed at assessing the ability of naïve judges to detect lies/truth by watching a videotaped interview; the second takes into account the interviewee's detectability as a liar or as telling the truth by a sample of judges. Additionally, this study is intended to evaluate the criteria adopted to support lie/truth detection and relate them with accuracy and confidence of detection. Results showed that judges' detection ability was moderately accurate and associated with a moderate individual sense of confidence, with a slightly better accuracy for truth detection than for lie detection. Detection accuracy appeared to be negatively associated with detection confidence when the interviewee was a liar, and positively associated when the interviewee was a truth-teller. Furthermore, judges were found to support lie detection through criteria concerning emotional features, and to sustain truth detection by taking into account the cognitive complexity and the paucity of expressive manifestations related with the interviewee's report. The present findings have implications for the judicial decision on witnesses' credibility.