Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The structure of deception: Validation of the lying profile questionnaire

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The conceptualization of deception as a dispositional trait is under-represented in the literature. Despite scientific evidence supporting the existence of individual differences in lying, a validated measure of dispositional deception is still lacking. This study aims to explore the structure of dispositional deception by validating a 16-item questionnaire to characterize individuals’ lying patterns. The final sample included 716 participants (Mean age = 25.02; 55.87% females) who were recruited via posters, flyers, and online social media platforms in Singapore. Our findings suggested four distinct latent dimensions: frequency, ability, negativity, and contextuality. We established the convergent validity of our measure by showing significant relationships with social desirability, malevolent traits, cognitive control deficits, normal and pathological personality traits, as well as demographic variables such as sex, age, and religiosity. Overall, the present study introduced a general framework to understanding deception as a dispositional trait.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abe, N. (2009). The neurobiology of deception: Evidence from neuroimaging and loss-of-function studies. Current Opinion in Neurology, 22(6), 594–600. https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0b013e328332c3cf.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Becker, T. E. (2005). Lying in negotiations: How individual and situational factors influence the use of neutralization strategies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 661–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arndt, J. E., Hoglund, W. L., & Fujiwara, E. (2013). Desirable responding mediates the relationship between emotion regulation and anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(2), 147–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The hexaco-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 340–345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Azizli, N., Atkinson, B. E., Baughman, H. M., Chin, K., Vernon, P. A., Harris, E., & Veselka, L. (2016). Lies and crimes: Dark triad, misconduct, and high-stakes deception. Personality and Individual Differences, 89, 34–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, L. F., Quigley, K. S., Bliss-Moreau, E., & Aronson, K. R. (2004). Interoceptive sensitivity and self-reports of emotional experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 684–697.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. (2005). The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behavior, 52(2), 336–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, C. F., & Robinson, M. (1988). The evolution of deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12(4), 295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, S. M., & Wang, T. S. (2007). Inhibitory control and emotion regulation in preschool children. Cognitive Development, 22(4), 489–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christ, S. E., Van Essen, D. C., Watson, J. M., Brubaker, L. E., & McDermott, K. B. (2008). The contributions of prefrontal cortex and executive control to deception: Evidence from activation likelihood estimate meta-analyses. Cerebral Cortex, 19(7), 1557–1566. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhn189.

  • Cyders, M. A., Littlefield, A. K., Coffey, S., & Karyadi, K. A. (2014). Examination of a short english version of the upps-p impulsive behaviour scale. Addictive Behaviours, 70, 1372–1376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Turck, M. A., & Miller, G. R. (1985). Deception and arousal: Isolating the behavioral correlates of deception. Human Communication Research, 12(2), 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, F. B. M. (2005). Intentional deception in primates. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 1(3), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.1360010306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debey, E., Verschuere, B., & Crombez, G. (2012). Lying and executive control: An experimental investigation using ego depletion and goal neglect. Acta Psychologica, 140(2), 133–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 979–995.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dike, C. C., Baranoski, M., & Griffith, E. E. H. (2005). Pathological lying revisited. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 33(3), 342–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckworth, A. L. (2011). The significance of self-control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(7), 2639–2640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, B. D., Galton, H. C., Morgan, R., Evans, D., Oliver, C., Meyer, M., Cusack, R., Lawrence, A. D., & Dalgleish, T. (2010). Listening to your heart: How interoception shapes emotion experience and intuitive decision making. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1835–1844.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • El Haj, M., Saloppé, X., & Nandrino, J. L. (2018). Destination memory and deception: When i lie to barack Obama about the moon. Psychological Research, 82(3), 600–606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elaad, E. (2018). Personality, demographic, and psychophysiological correlates of people’s self-assessed lying abilities. In Detecting Concealed Information and Deception: Recent Developments (pp. 353–376). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812729-2.00015-X.

  • Elaad, E., & Reizer, A. (2015). Personality correlates of the self-assessed abilities to tell and detect lies, tell truths, and believe others. Journal of Individual Differences., 36, 163–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enticott, P. G., Ogloff, J. R. P., & Bradshaw, J. L. (2006). Associations between laboratory measures of executive inhibitory control and self-reported impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(2), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., & Fried, E. I. (2018). Estimating psychological networks and their accuracy: A tutorial paper. Behavior Research Methods, 50(1), 195–212.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the eysenck personality questionnaire (junior and adult). Hodder.

  • Fino, E., Melogno, S., Iliceto, P., D’Aliesio, S., Pinto, M. A., Candilera, G., & Sabatello, U. (2014). Executive functions, impulsivity, and inhibitory control in adolescents: A structural equation model. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 10(2), 32–38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. J., & Katz, J. E. (2000). Social-desirability bias and the validity of self-reported values. Psychology & Marketing, 17(2), 105–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullam, R. S., McKie, S., & Dolan, M. C. (2009). Psychopathic traits and deception: Functional magnetic resonance imaging study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 194(3), 229–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Furman, D. J., Waugh, C. E., Bhattacharjee, K., Thompson, R. J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2013). Interoceptive awareness, positive affect, and decision making in major depressive disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 151(2), 780–785.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Füstös, J., Gramann, K., Herbert, B. M., & Pollatos, O. (2012). On the embodiment of emotion regulation: Interoceptive awareness facilitates reappraisal. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8(8), 911–917. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss089.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, S. N., Seth, A. K., Barrett, A. B., Suzuki, K., & Critchley, H. D. (2015). Knowing your own heart: Distinguishing interoceptive accuracy from interoceptive awareness. Biological Psychology, 104, 65–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gillath, O., Sesko, A. K., Shaver, P. R., & Chun, D. S. (2010). Attachment, authenticity, and honesty: Dispositional and experimentally induced security can reduce self-and other-deception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(5), 841–855.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gozna, L. F., Vrij, A., & Bull, R. (2001). The impact of individual differences on perceptions of lying in everyday life and in a high stake situation. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(7), 1203–1216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, S. B., & Yang, Y. (2015). Evaluation of dimensionality in the assessment of internal consistency reliability: Coefficient alpha and omega coefficients. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34(4), 14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. Sage Publications Inc..

  • Halevy, R., Shalvi, S., & Verschuere, B. (2014). Being honest about dishonesty: Correlating self-reports and actual lying. Human Communication Research, 40(1), 54–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. D., & Forth, A. E. (1985). Psychopathy and lateral preference. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 94(4), 541–546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C. M., Ritchie, T. D., Hepper, E. G., & Gebauer, J. E. (2015). The balanced inventory of desirable responding short form (bidr-16). SAGE Open, 5(4), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Beyond WEIRD: Towards a broad-based behavioral science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 111–135. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x10000725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirata, S. (1986). Tactical deception and understanding of others in chimpanzees. In Cognitive development in chimpanzees (pp. 265–276). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/4-431-30248-4_17.

  • Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., Wright, A. G., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). DSM-5 personality traits and dsm–iv personality disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121(2), 424–432.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, L. A., Arnett, J. J., Feldman, S. S., & Cauffman, E. (2004). The right to do wrong: Lying to parents among adolescents and emerging adults. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33(2), 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Lyons, M., Baughman, H. M., & Vernon, P. A. (2014). What a tangled web we weave: The dark triad traits and deception. Personality and Individual Differences, 70(6), 117–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., & Tost, J. (2010). I just cannot control myself: The dark triad and self-control. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(6), 611–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karim, A. A., Schneider, M., Lotze, M., Veit, R., Sauseng, P., Braun, C., & Birbaumer, N. (2010). The truth about lying: Inhibition of the anterior prefrontal cortex improves deceptive behaviour. Cerebral Cortex, 20(1), 205–213.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kashy, D. A., & DePaulo, B. M. (1996). Who lies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 1037–1051.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, S. B., Yaden, D. B., Hyde, E., & E, T. (2019). The light vs. dark triad of personality: Contrasting two very different profiles of human nature. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(467). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00467.

  • Kever, A., Pollatos, O., Vermeulen, N., & Grynberg, D. (2015). Interoceptive sensitivity facilitates both antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, N., Eickhoff, S. B., Scheller, M., Laird, A. R., Fox, P. T., & Habel, U. (2014). Neural network of cognitive emotion regulation an ALE meta-analysis and MACM analysis. NeuroImage, 87, 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. M., Au, R. K., Liu, H.-L., Ting, K., Huang, C.-M., & Chan, C. C. (2009). Are errors differentiable from deceptive responses when feigning memory impairment? An fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 69(2), 406–412.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leiner, D. J. (2013). Too fast, too straight, too weird: Post hoc identification of meaningless data in internet surveys. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2361661.

  • Levine, T. R., Kim, R. K., & Hamel, L. M. (2010). People lie for a reason: Three experiments documenting the principle of veracity. Communication Research Reports, 27(4), 271–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lüdecke, D., Makowski, D., & Waggoner, P. (2019a). Performance: Assessment of regression models performance (Vol. 4, p. 2). R Package Version 0.

  • Lüdecke, D., Waggoner, P., & Makowski, D. (2019b). Insight: A unified interface to access information from model objects in r. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(38), 1412. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lüdecke, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Patil, I., & Makowski, D. (2020). Extracting, computing and exploring the parameters of statistical models using R. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(53), 2445.

  • Makowski, D. (2018). Cognitive neuropsychology of implicit emotion regulation through fictional reappraisal. (Ph.D Thesis). Sorbonne Paris Cité, France

  • Makowski, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Chen, S. A., & Lüdecke, D. (2019a). Indices of effect existence and significance in the bayesian framework. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2zexr.

  • Makowski, D., Sperduti, M., Lavallée, S., Nicolas, S., & Piolino, P. (2019b). Adaptation and validation of a short french version of the affective style questionnaire. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 13(2), 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41811-019-00060-8.

  • Makowski, D., Ben-Shachar, M., & Lüdecke, D. (2019c). bayestestR: Describing effects and their uncertainty, existence and significance within the Bayesian framework. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(40), 1541. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01541.

  • Makowski, D., Sperduti, M., Nicolas, S., & Piolino, P. (2017). “Being there” and remembering it: Presence improves memory encoding. Consciousness and Cognition, 53, 194–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.06.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mehling, W. E., Acree, M., Stewart, A., Silas, J., & Jones, A. (2018). The multidimensional assessment of interoceptive awareness, version 2 (maia-2). PLoS One, 13(12), e0208034.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. D., Few, L. R., Wilson, L., Gentile, B., Widiger, T. A., MacKillop, J., & Keith Campbell, W. (2013). The five-factor narcissism inventory (ffni): A test of the convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of ffni scores in clinical and community samples. Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 748–758.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., Houts, R., Poulton, R., Roberts, B. W., Ross, S., & others. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(7), 2693–2698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ochsner, K. N., & Gross, J. J. (2005). The cognitive control of emotion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 242–249.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Panasiti, M. S., Pavone, E. F., Merla, A., & Aglioti, S. M. (2011). Situational and dispositional determinants of intentional deceiving. PLoS One, 6(4), e19465.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, C. J. (2010). Triarchic psychopathy measure. American Psychological Association (APA). https://doi.org/10.1037/t42471-000.

  • Patrick, C. J., Fowles, D. C., & Krueger, R. F. (2009). Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology, 21(3), 913–938.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-590241-0.50006-x.

  • Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poletti, M., Borelli, P., & Bonuccelli, U. (2011). The neuropsychological correlates of pathological lying: Evidence from behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia. Journal of Neurology, 258(11), 2009–2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-011-6058-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://www.R-project.org/.

  • Revelle, W. (2018). Psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Northwestern University https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.

  • Riva, G., Mantovani, F., Capideville, C. S., Preziosa, A., Morganti, F., Villani, D., Gaggioli, A., Botella, C., & Alcañiz, M. (2007). Affective interactions using virtual reality: The link between presence and emotions. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, J. (1996). Deceptive communication from collectivistic and individualistic perspectives. Intercultural Communication Studies, 2, 1–9.

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: AnRPackage for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.

  • Serota, K. B., & Levine, T. R. (2015). A few prolific liars: Variation in the prevalence of lying. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34(2), 138–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serota, K. B., Levine, T. R., & Boster, F. J. (2010). The prevalence of lying in america: Three studies of self-reported lies. Human Communication Research, 36(1), 2–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seth, A. K., Suzuki, K., & Critchley, H. D. (2012). An interoceptive predictive coding model of conscious presence. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 395.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, E. D., Miller, J. D., Few, L. R., Keith Campbell, W., Widiger, T. A., Crego, C., & Lynam, D. R. (2015). Development of a short form of the five-factor narcissism inventory: The ffni-sf. Psychological Assessment, 27(3), 1110–1116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C. G., Luyten, N., Purnomo, M., Mobberley, A., Wootton, L. W., Hammond, M. D., Sengupta, N., Perry, R., & West-Newman, T. (2011). The mini-ipip6: Validation and extension of a short measure of the big-six factors of personality in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 40(3), 142–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperduti, M., Makowski, D., Arcangeli, M., Wantzen, P., Zalla, T., Lemaire, S., Dokic, J., Pelletier, J., & Piolino, P. (2017). The distinctive role of executive functions in implicit emotion regulation. Acta Psychologica, 173, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.12.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tortoriello, G. K., & Hart, W. (2019). Blurring the dichotomy of good and evil: The idiosyncratic helping strategies associated with unmitigated-agentic and unmitigated-communal personalities. European Journal of Personality., 33, 674–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uziel, L. (2014). Impression management (“lie”) scales are associated with interpersonally oriented self-control, not other-deception. Journal of Personality, 82(3), 200–212.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, S. E., & Klonsky, E. D. (2016). Validation of a brief version of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale (ders-18) in five samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioural Assessment, 38(4), 582–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., & Semin, G. R. (1996). Lie experts’ beliefs about non-verbal indicators of deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 20(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, M. W. (2017). The reliability of multidimensional neuropsychological measures: From alpha to omega. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31(6–7), 1113–1126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, B., & Feldman, R. S. (2006). Looking good and lying to do it: Deception as an impression management strategy in job interviews. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 295–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiteside, S. P. H., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The five factor model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 669–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G. R. T., Berry, C. J., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2015). Good liars are neither ‘dark’ nor self-deceptive. PLoS One, 10(6), e0127315.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zvi, L., & Elaad, E. (2018). Correlates of narcissism, self-reported lies, and self-assessed abilities to tell and detect lies, tell truths, and believe others. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 15(3), 271–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, J. T. (2017). When deception gets personal: An exploration into personality's link to deception. (Honors Thesis). University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, USA.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank comrade Dr. Paul Boyce for his fealty, Alison Chew, Upamanyu Ghose, Arvind A. S. and Dayton Leow for their support and insights in the early stages of this study, as well as Dr. Wendy Carr for inspiration.

Data and Code Availability

The data and the R script for analysis are available on GitHub at https://github.com/DominiqueMakowski/2020structure. The complete statistical report is available in Supplementary Materials 1 and a transcript of the complete survey is available in Supplementary Materials 2. The final scale with the administration and scoring instructions is available at Supplementary Materials 3. An interactive web application to compute the scores of the questionnaire is available at https://neuropsychology.shinyapps.io/proflier.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Dominique Makowski, Tam Pham, Zen J. Lau & S. H. Annabel Chen

  2. Departments of Criminology, Psychiatry, and Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Adrian Raine

  3. Centre for Research and Development in Learning (CRADLE), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    S. H. Annabel Chen

  4. Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKC Medicine), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    S. H. Annabel Chen

Authors
  1. Dominique Makowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tam Pham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zen J. Lau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adrian Raine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. H. Annabel Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DM conceived the study. DM, TP and ZL participated in the study design, statistical analysis, data interpretation and manuscript drafting. AC coordinated the study. AC and AR provided input and expertise for the face validity of the items, provided input to the survey construction and performed a critical review of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dominique Makowski or S. H. Annabel Chen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (Reference Number: IRB-2019-02-026) of Nanyang Technological University (NTU).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(HTML 20557 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 4035 kb)

ESM 3

(DOCX 19 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Makowski, D., Pham, T., Lau, Z.J. et al. The structure of deception: Validation of the lying profile questionnaire. Curr Psychol 42, 4001–4016 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01760-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01760-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation