Lord777
Professional
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Points
- 113
Sometimes it's hard to lie.
Suppose a job candidate has done something outright stupid in her previous job, and suddenly, unexpectedly for her, a member of the selection committee mentions this stupidity in an interview. Wanting to get a job, the applicant does not want to admit her oversight and must immediately come up with a fabricated but plausible explanation. It is not simple. She may have to think hard about what might increase the number of speech errors and slow down the rate of speech.
Liars aren't always caught off guard, however.
In particular, many guilty suspects are aware of the possibility of asking the police about what they were doing on the day the crime took place. Obviously, in this situation, lying is not difficult.
When a police officer asks him about his occupation at the time of the crime, a well-trained suspect will simply give a prepared answer. So how do liars behave when they have the opportunity to plot their lies? In practice, it has been found that, compared to spontaneous lying, planned lies are characterized by a shorter period of silence and a higher rate of speech (Zuckerman & Driver, 1985).
Telling a premeditated lie is easier than composing on the fly, so there will be fewer behavioral signs of tense thinking in this case.
In their experiment, participants had to retell a movie they had just watched. In the event of a lie, they were required to add details to the retelling that were not in the film. But Hoefer and the other experimenters said in advance what to say.
It was found that liars made fewer speech errors compared to truthful answers.
There are two likely explanations for these results.
Sometimes a liar doesn't need to come up with an answer, but only needs to hide some information. When a customs officer asks smugglers about the contents of their bags, they only need to withhold some information, that is, not to mention the smuggling. Some of Fry's works have examined how liars behave in such situations.
In these studies, the “liars” participants had to deny that they had headphones that they actually had. In other words, their goal was to hide some information. Their responses were compared to those who really didn't have headphones. Liars made fewer verbal errors and spoke faster than "truthful ones." The rational for such differences is the influence of the factor of the desire to control. As mentioned above, liars try to give the impression of being sincere and therefore avoid stumbling and slow speech. As a result, speech becomes fast and unusually smooth.
Summarizing the above, research results have shown that logically more complex lies lead to an increase in speech errors and a slowdown in the tempo of speech. "Light" lies (well prepared or simple silence) are not accompanied by such patterns, and may even give the opposite picture - a decrease in the number of speech errors and speech acceleration.
Scientists have studied in more detail the indirect influence of the logical complexity of lying on the occurrence of stuttering in speech (Vrij & Heaven, 1999).
It has been hypothesized that, in terms of seeking control, liars will try to avoid stumbling when they tell a lie. It was expected that they would only succeed in those cases when the lie was easy. Participants were shown a short video about a family dispute. First, a man appeared and said that he wanted to buy a satellite dish, and then he would be able to watch football at home, and not go to the bar for this. Then a woman appeared on the screen and said that the only reason for buying a satellite dish was so that he could bring his buddies from the bar and watch porno channels. After watching this video, the participants had to tell the truth about some aspects of this film and lie about others. One type of lie was easy enough to come up with - incorrect descriptions of the sequence of people appearing on the screen.
As expected, liars were more likely to stumble (versus truth-telling) when the lie was cognitively difficult, and they were less likely to stumble (versus truthful answers) when the lie was easy.
Suppose a job candidate has done something outright stupid in her previous job, and suddenly, unexpectedly for her, a member of the selection committee mentions this stupidity in an interview. Wanting to get a job, the applicant does not want to admit her oversight and must immediately come up with a fabricated but plausible explanation. It is not simple. She may have to think hard about what might increase the number of speech errors and slow down the rate of speech.
Liars aren't always caught off guard, however.
They often know what questions to expect and can therefore prepare and come up with convincing and believable answers.
In particular, many guilty suspects are aware of the possibility of asking the police about what they were doing on the day the crime took place. Obviously, in this situation, lying is not difficult.
When a police officer asks him about his occupation at the time of the crime, a well-trained suspect will simply give a prepared answer. So how do liars behave when they have the opportunity to plot their lies? In practice, it has been found that, compared to spontaneous lying, planned lies are characterized by a shorter period of silence and a higher rate of speech (Zuckerman & Driver, 1985).
Telling a premeditated lie is easier than composing on the fly, so there will be fewer behavioral signs of tense thinking in this case.
Höfer et al write that there are fewer speech errors with planned lies - even fewer than those who tell the truth (Hcfer, Kdinken, Hanewinkel & Bruhn, 1993).
In their experiment, participants had to retell a movie they had just watched. In the event of a lie, they were required to add details to the retelling that were not in the film. But Hoefer and the other experimenters said in advance what to say.
It was found that liars made fewer speech errors compared to truthful answers.
There are two likely explanations for these results.
- First, in this study, the liars may have had an easier task than the truth-tellers. Liars could simply repeat what they were told, and with a truthful answer, it was necessary to think about the film and formulate the answer. As already mentioned, the easier the task, the fewer speech errors.
- Second, the decrease in the number of errors in speech may be associated with the tendency of liars to over-control their behavior. They may assume that speech mistakes will help expose the lie and, by trying to appear honest, try to avoid mistakes. This will result in unusually smooth speech.
Sometimes a liar doesn't need to come up with an answer, but only needs to hide some information. When a customs officer asks smugglers about the contents of their bags, they only need to withhold some information, that is, not to mention the smuggling. Some of Fry's works have examined how liars behave in such situations.
In these studies, the “liars” participants had to deny that they had headphones that they actually had. In other words, their goal was to hide some information. Their responses were compared to those who really didn't have headphones. Liars made fewer verbal errors and spoke faster than "truthful ones." The rational for such differences is the influence of the factor of the desire to control. As mentioned above, liars try to give the impression of being sincere and therefore avoid stumbling and slow speech. As a result, speech becomes fast and unusually smooth.
Summarizing the above, research results have shown that logically more complex lies lead to an increase in speech errors and a slowdown in the tempo of speech. "Light" lies (well prepared or simple silence) are not accompanied by such patterns, and may even give the opposite picture - a decrease in the number of speech errors and speech acceleration.
Scientists have studied in more detail the indirect influence of the logical complexity of lying on the occurrence of stuttering in speech (Vrij & Heaven, 1999).
It has been hypothesized that, in terms of seeking control, liars will try to avoid stumbling when they tell a lie. It was expected that they would only succeed in those cases when the lie was easy. Participants were shown a short video about a family dispute. First, a man appeared and said that he wanted to buy a satellite dish, and then he would be able to watch football at home, and not go to the bar for this. Then a woman appeared on the screen and said that the only reason for buying a satellite dish was so that he could bring his buddies from the bar and watch porno channels. After watching this video, the participants had to tell the truth about some aspects of this film and lie about others. One type of lie was easy enough to come up with - incorrect descriptions of the sequence of people appearing on the screen.
As expected, liars were more likely to stumble (versus truth-telling) when the lie was cognitively difficult, and they were less likely to stumble (versus truthful answers) when the lie was easy.