Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fugita, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Wexley, K. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Fugita, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Wexley, K. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 6, No. 4, 637-643 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/014616728064014

Perceptions of Deception

Perceived Expertise in Detecting Deception, Successfulness of Deception and Nonverbal Cues

Stephen S. Fugita

University of Akron

Mark C. Hogrebe

University of Akron

Kenneth N. Wexley

University of Akron

A study was conducted to identify facial nonverbal behaviors and interactants' perceptions associated with deception. Forty males attempted to deceive both a perceived expert and nonexpert in detecting deception. Subjects were able to effectively, control their facial cues when they, were being deceptive, emitting similar cues when they were lying and telling the truth. However, they glanced more frequently and maintained more eye contact with the expert than the nonexpert. Interestingly, although subjects were confident in their ability to deceive interviewers, in reality they, overestimated their actual success. Interviewers were able to identify both their deceptive and truthful statements at a better than chance level.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?