Advertisement

Nonverbal Markers of Lying During Children’s Collective Interviewing with Friends

  • Hilal H. Şen
  • Aylin C. Küntay
Original Paper

Abstract

To examine nonverbal behaviors that may differentiate between lie- and truth-tellers, recent studies have relied on collective interviews (e.g., Vrij and Granhag in Appl Cognit Psychol 28(6):936–944, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3071), where participants were solicited to fake their responses about an unexperienced event. In this study, we made participants experience actual events that involved a potential rule violation, and later interviewed them collectively and unanticipatedly about these previously experienced events. Ninety same-sex preschool dyads were observed in a temptation resistance paradigm, where an adult experimenter proscribed touching of attractive toys and left the children alone. The dyads of children were later interviewed by the experimenter about how they handled this rule. Nonverbal behaviors were coded during the entire interview phase where they could lie by withholding transgression (i.e., lying by omission) and right after a target question where children chose to lie or tell the truth (i.e., lying by commission). Truth-tellers and lie-tellers showed (1) differences in response latency, looking at friend, and use of gestures right after the target question, but were (2) similar in their interactive nonverbal behaviors during the entire interview (i.e., speech transition, looking at friend, and utterance rate). This is the first study showing that nonverbal behaviors accompanying lie-telling behavior are different when a collective interview is carried out in a spontaneous deceptive context as opposed to planned deceptive contexts.

Keywords

Spontaneous lying Nonverbal indicators of lying Collective interview Lying by omission Lying by commission Dyadic context 

References

  1. Audacity Team. (2012). Audacity (Version 1.3.4-beta) [Computer program]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://audacity.sourceforge.net/.
  2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.  https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blum-Kulka, S. (1997). Dinner talk: Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bogetic, K. (2011). Interruptions and the dyadic co-narration of shared experiences in English and Serbian conversation. Language and Communication, 31, 318–328.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2011.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bok, S. (1978). Lying: Moral choices in public and private life. New York, NY: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  6. Bokus, B. (1992). Peer co-narration: Changes in structure of preschoolers’ participation. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 2(3), 253–275.  https://doi.org/10.1075/jnlh.2.3.05pee.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bond, C. F., & Fahey, W. E. (1987). False suspicion and the misperception of deceit. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26(1), 41–46.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00759.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buller, D. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6, 203–242.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00127.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burger, L. K., & Miller, P. J. (1999). Early talk about the past revisited: Affect in working-class and middle-class children’s co-narrations. Journal of Child Language, 26(1), 133–162.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000998003675.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Burgoon, J. K. (2005). The future of motivated deception and its detection. Annals of the International Communication Association, 29(1), 49–95.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2005.11679044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burgoon, J. K., & Floyd, K. (2000). Testing for the motivational impairment effect during deceptive and truthful interaction. Western Journal of Communication, 64, 243–267.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310009374675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burgoon, J. K., Kelley, D. L., Newton, D. A., & Keeley-Dyreson, M. P. (1989). The nature of arousal and nonverbal indices. Human Communication Research, 16(2), 217–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Casillas, M., Bobb, S., & Clark, E. (2016). Turn-taking, timing, and planning in early language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 43(6), 1310–1337.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000689.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Coates, J. (2005). Masculinity, collaborative narration and the heterosexual couple. In J. Thornborrow & J. Coates (Eds.), The sociolinguistics of narrative (pp. 89–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crossman, A. M., & Lewis, M. (2006). Adults’ ability to detect children’s lying. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 24, 703–715.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.731.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. de Ruiter, J. P., Mitterer, H., & Enfield, N. (2006). Projecting the end of a speaker’s turn: A cognitive cornerstone of conversation. Language, 82(3), 515–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DePaulo, B. M. (1988). Nonverbal aspects of deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12(3), 153–161.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DePaulo, B. M., & Kirkendol, S. E. (1989). The motivational impairment effect in the communication of deception. In J. C. Yuille (Ed.), Credibility assessment (pp. 51–70). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74–118.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. DePaulo, B. M., & Morris, W. L. (2000). Discerning lies from truths: Behavioural cues to deception and the indirect pathway of intuition. In P. A. Granhag & L. A. Strönwall (Eds.), The detection of deception in forensic contexts (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Driskell, J. E., Salas, E., & Driskell, T. (2012). Social indicators of deception. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 54(4), 577–588.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812446338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ekman, P. (2009). Lie catching and micro expressions. In C. Martin (Ed.), The philosophy of deception (pp. 118–138). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ervin-Tripp, S. (1979). Children’s verbal turn-taking. In E. Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 391–414). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hilbrink, E. E., Gattis, M., & Levinson, S. C. (2015). Early developmental changes in the timing of turn-taking: A longitudinal study of mother–infant interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1492.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01492.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Hollingshead, A. B. (1998). Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 659–671.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jundi, S., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., & Hillman, J. (2013a). Establishing evidence through undercover and collective intelligence interviewing. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19(3), 297–306.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jundi, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Hope, L., Hillman, J., Warmelink, L., et al. (2013b). Who should I look at? Eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 19(8), 661–671.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kochanska, G., & Aksan, N. (1995). Mother-child mutually positive affect, quality of child compliance to requests and prohibitions, and maternal control as correlates of early internalization. Child Development, 66, 236–254.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00868.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leung, C. M. (2009). Collaborative narration in preadolescent girl talk: A saturday luncheon conversation among three friends. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1341–1357.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewis, M., Stranger, C., & Sullivan, M. W. (1989). Deception in 3-year-olds. Developmental Psychology, 25, 439–443.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.3.439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu, M., Granhag, P. A., Landstrom, S., Roos af Hjelmsater, E., Stromwall, l, & Vrij, A. (2010). ‘‘Can you remember what was in your pocket when you were stung by a bee?’’: Eliciting cues to deception by asking the unanticipated. The Open Criminology Journal, 3, 31–36.  https://doi.org/10.2174/1874917801003010031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mann, S., Ewens, S., Shaw, D., Vrij, A., Leal, S., & Hillman, J. (2013). Lying eyes: Why liars seek deliberate eye contact. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20(3), 452–461.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2013.791218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 5 Nov 2017.
  34. Schweitzer, M. E., & Croson, R. (1999). Curtailing deception: The impact of direct questions on lies and omissions. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10, 225–248.  https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Serras Pereira, M., Postma, E., Shahid, S., & Swerts, M. (2014). Are you lying to me? Exploring children’s nonverbal cues to deception. In Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the cognitive science society, Tilburg (pp. 2901–2906).Google Scholar
  36. Siposova, B., Tomasello, M., & Carpenter, M. (2018). Communicative eye contact signals a commitment to cooperate for young children. Cognition, 179, 192–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Sloetjes, H., & Wittenburg, P. (2008). Annotation by category—ELAN and ISO DCR. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on language resources and evaluation, Marrakech.Google Scholar
  38. Sporer, S. L., & Schwandt, B. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 421–446.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spranca, M., Minsk, E., & Baron, J. (1991). Omission and commission in judgment and choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 76–105.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(91)90011-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., et al. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-talking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10587–10592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suchotzki, K., Verschuere, B., Van Bockstaele, B., Ben-Shakhar, G., & Crombez, G. (2017). Lying takes time: A meta-analysis on reaction time measures of deception. Psychological Bulletin, 143(4), 428–453.  https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000087.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Talwar, V., & Crossman, A. M. (2012). Children’s lies and their detection: Implications for child witness testimony. Developmental Review, 32, 337–359.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2012.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Talwar, V., & Lee, K. (2002). Development of lying to conceal a transgression: Children’s control of expressive behavior during verbal deception. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(5), 436–444.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250143000373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Talwar, V., & Lee, K. (2008). Social and cognitive correlates of children’s lying behavior. Child Development, 79, 866–881.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01164.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. ten Bosch, L., Oostdijk, N., & Boves, L. (2005). On temporal aspects of turn taking in conversational dialogues. Speech Communication, 47(1–2), 80–86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vernham, Z., Vrij, A., Leal, S., & Mann, S. (2014). Collective interviewing: A transactive memory approach towards identifying signs of truthfulness. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 12–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.01.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vrij, A. (2000). Detecting lies and deceit: The psychology of lying and implications for professional practice. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  48. Vrij, A. (2002). Deception in children: A literature review and implications for children’s testimony. In H. Westcott, G. Davies, & R. Bull (Eds.), Children’s testimony: A handbook of psychological research and forensic practice (pp. 175–194)., (Wiley’s series in the psychology of crime, policing and law) Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vrij, A., Akehurst, L., Soukara, S., & Bull, R. (2004). Detecting deceit via analyses of verbal and nonverbal behavior in children and adults. Human Communication Research, 30(1), 8–41.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00723.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vrij, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2014). Eliciting information and detecting lies in intelligence interviewing: An overview of recent research. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(6), 936–944.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vrij, A., Jundi, S., Hope, L., Hillman, J., Gahr, E., Leal, S., et al. (2012). Collective interviewing of suspects. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 41–44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2011.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Williams, E. J., Bott, L. A., Patrick, J., & Lewis, M. B. (2013). Telling lies: The irrepressible truth. PLoS ONE, 8(4), 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wyman, E., Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2012). Non-verbal communication enables children’s coordination in a ‘‘Stag Hunt’’ game. European Journal of Developmental Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.726469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 1–59). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyKoç UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations