Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DePaulo, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by DePaulo, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J. L.
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. 8, No. 2, 273-279 (1982)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167282082014
© 1982 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Attentional Determinants of Success at Detecting Deception and Truth

Bella M. DePaulo

University of Virginia

G. Daniel Lassiter

University of Virginia

Julie L. Stone

University of Virginia

Subjects, 22 males and 22 females, observed a videotape of 6 males and 6females who were sometimes lying and sometimes telling the truth. Subjects were instructed to pay special attention to the tone of voice, the words, or the visual cues of the senders, or were given no special attentional instructions (control condition). Subjects told to pay particular attention to the tone of voice were significantly more successful at distinguishing truth from deception than subjects in the control condition. Further analyses showed that the instructions to subjects to attend to tone significantly increased the degree to which they rated the truthful messages as truthful, but it did not increase the degree to which the;' rated the deceptive messages as deceptive. It was suggested that tone of voice cues may be particularly informative to perceivers making judgments of truthfulness, and that perceivers do not always take full advantage of the cues that are available to them.


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?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
J. A. Forrest and R. S. Feldman
Detecting Deception and Judge's Involvement: Lower Task Involvement Leads to Better Lie Detection
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2000; 26(1): 118 - 125.
[Abstract] [PDF]