Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Individual and Small Group Accuracy in Judging Truthful and Deceptive Communication

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examined accuracy in detecting the truths and lies of 10 videotaped students who offered their opinions on the death penalty or smoking in public. Student lie detectors were randomly assigned to either the individual condition, where they reported their veracity judgments and confidence independently, or the small group condition, where they recorded their judgments privately and then deliberated with 5 other students before making a consensus judgment of lie, truth, or hung. Results indicated that small group judgments were more accurate than individual judgments when judging deceptive but not truthful communication. Small group individuals also reported greater confidence in their abilities after the task. Finally, groups with a greater number of hung judgments were more accurate, likely due to their employing hung judgments for the most difficult to judge stimulus communicators. These results raise implications for real life group judgments, particularly in light of the increasing availability of technology.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, D. E., B. M. DePaulo, M. E. Ansfield, J. J. Tickle, and E. Green. (1998). “Beliefs About Cues to Deception: Mindless Stereotypes or Untapped Wisdom?” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 23, 67–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, M., J. Hager, P. Ekman, and T. Sejnowski. (1999). “Measuring Facial Expressions by Computer Image Analysis,” Psychophysiology 36, 253–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buller, D. B. and J. K. Burgoon. (1996). “Interpersonal Deception Theory,” Communication Theory 6, 203–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buller, D. B., K. D. Strzyzewski, and F. Hunsaker. (1991). “Interpersonal Deception: II. The Inferiority of Conversational Participants as Deception Detectors,” Communication Monographs 58, 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon, J. K., D. B. Buller, L. K. Guerero, W. Afifi, and C. Feldman. (1996). “Interpersonal Deception: XII. Information Management Dimensions Underlying Types of Deceptive Messages,” Communication Monographs 63, 50–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coy v. Iowa (1988). in United States Law Week 56.

  • Davies, G. (1999). “The Impact of Television on the Presentation and Reception of Children's Testimony,” International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 22, 241–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., K. Charlton, H. Cooper, J. J. Lindsay, and L. Muhlenbruck. (1997). “The Accuracy-Confidence Correlation in the Detection of Deception,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 4, 346–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., D. A. Kashy, S. E. Kirkensol, M. M. Wer, and J. E. Epstein. (1996). “Lying in Everyday Life,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, 63–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., S. E. Kirkendol, J. Tang, and T. P. O'Brien. (1988). “The Motivational Impairment Effect in the Communication of Deception: Replication and Extensions,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 12, 177–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., K. Lanier, and T. Davis. (1983). “Detecting the Deceit of the Motivated Liar,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45, 1096–1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., J. J. Lindsay, B. E. Malone, L. Muhlenbruck, K. Charlton, and H. Cooper. (2003). “Cues to Deception,” Psychological Bulletin 129, 74–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., J. Stone and D. Lassiter. (1985). “Deceiving and Detecting Deceit,” in B. R. Schlenker (ed.), The Self and Social Life. New York: McGraw-Hill, 323–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • deTurck, M. A. and G. R. Miller. (1990). “Training Observers to Detect Deception: Effects of Self-Monitoring and Rehearsal,” Human Communication Research 16, 603–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P. (1985/2001). Telling Lies. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., W. V. Friesen, and M. O'Sullivan. (1988). “Smiles When Lying,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 414–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., M. O'Sullivan, W. V. Friesen, and K. Scherer. (1991). “Invited Article: Face, Voice, and Body in Detecting Deceit,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 15, 125–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., M. O'Sullivan, and M. G. Frank. (1999). “A Few Can Catch a Liar,” Psychological Science 10, 263–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P. and E. L. Rosenberg. (1997). What the Face Reveals: Basic and Applied Studies of Spontaneous Expression using the Facial Action Coding System. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, T. H. and M. A. deTurck. (1995). “Global Cue Usage in Behavioral Lie Detection,” Communication Quarterly 43, 420–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, T. H. and M. A. deTurck. (1997a). “Case-Relevant and Case-Irrelevant Questioning in Behavioral Lie Detection,” Communication Reports 10, 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, T. H. and M. A. deTurck. (1997b). “Behavior as Seen by the Actor as Seen by the Observer: The Case of Lie Detection,” Paper presented to International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, Quebec.

  • Feeley, T. H. and M. A. deTurck. (1998). “The Behavioral Correlates of Sanctioned and Unsanctioned Deceptive Communication,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 22, 189–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, T. H., M. A. deTurck, and M. J. Young. (1995). “Behavioral Familiarity in Lie Detection,” Communication Research Reports 12, 160–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeley, T. H. and M. J. Young. (1998). “Humans as Lie Detectors: Some More Second Thoughts,” Communication Quarterly 46, 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, K. and I. Walka. (1993). “Training Lie Detectors to Use Nonverbal Cues Instead of Global Heuristics,” Human Communication Research 20, 199–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. G. (2003). “Getting to Know Your Patient: How Facial Expression Reveals True Emotion,” in M. Katsikitis (ed.), The Clinical Application of Facial Measurement: Methods and Meaning. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 255–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. G. and P. Ekman. (1997). “The Ability to Detect Deceit Generalizes Across Different Types of High Stake Lies,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72, 1429–1439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, M. G. and T. H. Feeley. (2003). “To Catch a Liar: Challenges for Research in Lie Detection Training,” Journal of Applied Communication Research 31, 58–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, K. and P. Noller. (1988). “Decoding Deception: A Look at the Process,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 12, 217–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalbfleisch, P. J. (1992). “Deceit, Distrust and the Social Milieu: Application of Deception Research in a Troubled World,” Journal of Applied Communication Research 20, 308–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R. E. (1980). “Humans as Lie Detectors: Some Second Thoughts,” Journal of Communication 30, 209–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R. E., M. Patterson, V. Lundmark, S. Kiesler, T. Mukopadhyay, and W. Scherlis. (1998). “Internet Paradox: A Social Technology that Reduces Social Involvement and Psychological Well Being?” American Psychologist 53, 1017–1031.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, T. R. and S. A. McCornack. (1992). “Linking Love and Lies: A Formal Test of the McCornack and Parks Model of Deception Detection,” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 9, 143–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, T. R., H. S. Park, and S. A. McCornack. (1999). “Accuracy in Detecting Truths and Lies: Documenting the 'Veracity Effect',” Communication Monographs 66, 125–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lien, J., T. Kanade, J. F. Cohn, and C. Li. (2000). “Detection, Tracking, and Classification of Action Units in Subtle Changes of Facial Expression,” Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems 31, 131–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykken, D. T. (1998). A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCornack, S. A. and M. Parks. (1986). “Deception Detection and the Other Side of Trust,” in M. L. McLaughlin (ed.), Communication Yearbook 9. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 377–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, M. G. and K. U. Millar. (1997). “The Effects of Cognitive Capacity and Suspicion on Truth Bias,” Communication Research 24, 556–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. R. and J. B. Stiff. (1993). Deceptive Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orcutt, H. K., G. S. Goodman, A. E. Tobey, J. M. Batterman-Faunce, and S. Thomas. (2001). “Detecting Deception in Children's Testimony: Factfinders' Abilities to Reach the Truth in Open Court and Closed-Circuit Trials,” Law and Human Behavior 25, 339–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, E., T. R. Levine, C. Harms, and M. Ferrara. (2002). “Group and Individual Accuracy in Deception Detection,” Communication Research Reports 19, 99–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. S., T. R. Levine, S. A. McCornack, K. Morrison, and M. Ferrara. (2002). “How People Really Detect Lies,” Communication Monographs 69, 144–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, P. B., M. T. Dzindolet, G. Poletes, and L. M. Camacho. (1993). “Perception of Performance in Group Brainstorming: The Illusion of Group Productivity,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19, 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowatt, W. C., M. R. Cunningham, and P. B. Druen. (1998). “Deception to Get a Date,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24, 1228–1242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiff, J. B, H. J. Kim, and C. Ramesh. (1992). “Truth Biases and Aroused Suspicion in Relational Deception,” Communication Research 19, 326–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiff, J. B., S. R. Corman, R. Krizek, and E. Snider. (1994). “Individual Differences and Changes in Nonverbal Behavior: Unmasking the Changing Faces of Deception,” Communication Research 21, 555–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, E., T. R. Levine, C. Harms, and M. Ferrara. (2002). “Group and Individual Accuracy in Deception Detection,” Communication Research Reports 19, 99–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. D. and J. W. Schooler. (1991). “Thinking Too Much: Introspection Can Reduce the Quality of Preferences and Decisions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60, 181–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, M., B. M. DePaulo, and R. Rosenthal. (1981). “Verbal and Nonverbal Communication of Deception,” in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 14. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1–59.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The State University of New Jersey, Rutgers, New Jersey, USA

    Mark G. Frank

  2. State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Thomas Hugh Feeley, Nicole Paolantonio & Timothy J. Servoss

Authors
  1. Mark G. Frank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Hugh Feeley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicole Paolantonio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Timothy J. Servoss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Frank, M.G., Feeley, T.H., Paolantonio, N. et al. Individual and Small Group Accuracy in Judging Truthful and Deceptive Communication. Group Decision and Negotiation 13, 45–59 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000011945.85141.af

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000011945.85141.af

Keywords

Search

Navigation