Limits...
Increasing skepticism toward potential liars: effects of existential threat on veracity judgments and the moderating role of honesty norm activation.

Schindler S, Reinhard MA - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: With the present research, we investigated effects of existential threat on veracity judgments.In a first study, we found initial evidence for this assumption.Results revealed evidence for our prediction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Kassel Kassel, Germany.

ABSTRACT
With the present research, we investigated effects of existential threat on veracity judgments. According to several meta-analyses, people judge potentially deceptive messages of other people as true rather than as false (so-called truth bias). This judgmental bias has been shown to depend on how people weigh the error of judging a true message as a lie (error 1) and the error of judging a lie as a true message (error 2). The weight of these errors has been further shown to be affected by situational variables. Given that research on terror management theory has found evidence that mortality salience (MS) increases the sensitivity toward the compliance of cultural norms, especially when they are of focal attention, we assumed that when the honesty norm is activated, MS affects judgmental error weighing and, consequently, judgmental biases. Specifically, activating the norm of honesty should decrease the weight of error 1 (the error of judging a true message as a lie) and increase the weight of error 2 (the error of judging a lie as a true message) when mortality is salient. In a first study, we found initial evidence for this assumption. Furthermore, the change in error weighing should reduce the truth bias, automatically resulting in better detection accuracy of actual lies and worse accuracy of actual true statements. In two further studies, we manipulated MS and honesty norm activation before participants judged several videos containing actual truths or lies. Results revealed evidence for our prediction. Moreover, in Study 3, the truth bias was increased after MS when group solidarity was previously emphasized.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Means of detection accuracy of actual lies (in %) as a function of norm activation and salience condition in Study 3.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555659&req=5

Figure 4: Means of detection accuracy of actual lies (in %) as a function of norm activation and salience condition in Study 3.

Mentions: Overall, the mean percentage of correct lie-truth classifications was 50.62% (SD = 16.76). On average, participants were not better than chance in their lie-truth classifications, t < 1. Results of the mixed-model design 2 (Salience: MS vs. TV control condition) × 2 (Norm activation: honesty vs. no-activation control condition) × 2 (Type of message: lie vs. truth) ANOVA on detection accuracy (in %) revealed a main effect of the type of message, indicating that participants were better at classifying actual truthful messages as true (M = 60.49%, SD = 20.87) than they were at classifying actual deceptive messages as lies (M = 40.74%, SD = 23.53), F(1,77) = 38.25, p < 0.001, = 0.33 (veracity effect). Most importantly, however, the ANOVA yielded the predicted three-way interaction, F(1,77) = 4.87, p = 0.030, = 0.06. Simple effects analyses for detection accuracy for actual lies within the honesty condition revealed that participants under MS were marginally significantly better (M = 47.50%, SD = 26.78) compared to the dental pain control condition (M = 36.25%, SD = 23.61), F(1,77) = 3.05, p = 0.085 (see Figure 4). Additionally, and in line with our argument that activating different norms should be responsible for this effect, simple effects within the MS condition showed that participants in the honesty condition were also significantly better at detecting actual lies (M = 47.50%) than were participants in the solidarity condition (M = 33.75%), F(1,77) = 4.55, p = 0.036. Simple effects within the solidarity condition indicated that participants under MS were marginally significantly better worse (M = 33.75%, SD = 18.63) than in the dental pain control condition (M = 45.24%, SD = 23.21), F(1,77) = 3.26, p = 0.075. Norm activation within the dental pain control condition revealed no significant effect, p = 0.166. Regarding detection accuracy for actual true messages, no effects occurred (accuracy ranged from 57.50 to 62.50%), all Fs < 1.


Increasing skepticism toward potential liars: effects of existential threat on veracity judgments and the moderating role of honesty norm activation.

Schindler S, Reinhard MA - Front Psychol (2015)

Means of detection accuracy of actual lies (in %) as a function of norm activation and salience condition in Study 3.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555659&req=5

Figure 4: Means of detection accuracy of actual lies (in %) as a function of norm activation and salience condition in Study 3.
Mentions: Overall, the mean percentage of correct lie-truth classifications was 50.62% (SD = 16.76). On average, participants were not better than chance in their lie-truth classifications, t < 1. Results of the mixed-model design 2 (Salience: MS vs. TV control condition) × 2 (Norm activation: honesty vs. no-activation control condition) × 2 (Type of message: lie vs. truth) ANOVA on detection accuracy (in %) revealed a main effect of the type of message, indicating that participants were better at classifying actual truthful messages as true (M = 60.49%, SD = 20.87) than they were at classifying actual deceptive messages as lies (M = 40.74%, SD = 23.53), F(1,77) = 38.25, p < 0.001, = 0.33 (veracity effect). Most importantly, however, the ANOVA yielded the predicted three-way interaction, F(1,77) = 4.87, p = 0.030, = 0.06. Simple effects analyses for detection accuracy for actual lies within the honesty condition revealed that participants under MS were marginally significantly better (M = 47.50%, SD = 26.78) compared to the dental pain control condition (M = 36.25%, SD = 23.61), F(1,77) = 3.05, p = 0.085 (see Figure 4). Additionally, and in line with our argument that activating different norms should be responsible for this effect, simple effects within the MS condition showed that participants in the honesty condition were also significantly better at detecting actual lies (M = 47.50%) than were participants in the solidarity condition (M = 33.75%), F(1,77) = 4.55, p = 0.036. Simple effects within the solidarity condition indicated that participants under MS were marginally significantly better worse (M = 33.75%, SD = 18.63) than in the dental pain control condition (M = 45.24%, SD = 23.21), F(1,77) = 3.26, p = 0.075. Norm activation within the dental pain control condition revealed no significant effect, p = 0.166. Regarding detection accuracy for actual true messages, no effects occurred (accuracy ranged from 57.50 to 62.50%), all Fs < 1.

Bottom Line: With the present research, we investigated effects of existential threat on veracity judgments.In a first study, we found initial evidence for this assumption.Results revealed evidence for our prediction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Kassel Kassel, Germany.

ABSTRACT
With the present research, we investigated effects of existential threat on veracity judgments. According to several meta-analyses, people judge potentially deceptive messages of other people as true rather than as false (so-called truth bias). This judgmental bias has been shown to depend on how people weigh the error of judging a true message as a lie (error 1) and the error of judging a lie as a true message (error 2). The weight of these errors has been further shown to be affected by situational variables. Given that research on terror management theory has found evidence that mortality salience (MS) increases the sensitivity toward the compliance of cultural norms, especially when they are of focal attention, we assumed that when the honesty norm is activated, MS affects judgmental error weighing and, consequently, judgmental biases. Specifically, activating the norm of honesty should decrease the weight of error 1 (the error of judging a true message as a lie) and increase the weight of error 2 (the error of judging a lie as a true message) when mortality is salient. In a first study, we found initial evidence for this assumption. Furthermore, the change in error weighing should reduce the truth bias, automatically resulting in better detection accuracy of actual lies and worse accuracy of actual true statements. In two further studies, we manipulated MS and honesty norm activation before participants judged several videos containing actual truths or lies. Results revealed evidence for our prediction. Moreover, in Study 3, the truth bias was increased after MS when group solidarity was previously emphasized.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus