Adults' ability to detect children's lying

Crossman, Angela M.; Lewis, Michael Bevan

doi:10.1002/bsl.731

Cited by 53 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that parents may have a specialized ability to detect the lies of their own children. One possible explanation for this may be drawn from research showing that experience and familiarity is likely a supporting factor in detecting children's lies (Crossman & Lewis, 2006;O'Sullivan, 2005;Westcott et al, 1991). Indeed, in our study, parents detected children's truth and lies (59.6%) at similar rates to those reported in studies with professionals who work with children (55% to 65%) (e.g., Westcott et al, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Furthermore, in another study that used a more naturalistic situation in which children spontaneously chose to lie to conceal a transgression, also found that parents were poor at detecting children's lies. Similar research has also reported the poor detection abilities of parents (e.g., Crossman & Lewis, 2006). Thus, it appears that parents may not actually be good at detection.…”

Section: Detecting Children's Liesmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Stouthamer-Loeber (1991) reported that mothers get along less well with those children who they see as lying more frequently. On the other hand, if a parent does not detect a child's dishonest behavior, they are not able to correct these behaviors or teach children the value of (Crossman & Lewis, 2006). Thus, it may be that these feelings reflect a parental coping strategy to deal with children's dishonesty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Detecting children’s lies: Are parents accurate judges of their own children’s lies?

Talwar

Renaud

Conway

2015

Journal of Moral Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Detecting Children's Liesmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detecting children’s lies: Are parents accurate judges of their own children’s lies?

Talwar

Renaud

Conway

2015

Journal of Moral Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Like adults, children seem to be aware of nonverbal cues (Talwar, Lee, Bala, & Lindsay, 2004) and able to control nonverbal cues quite effectively (e.g., Lewis, Stanger, & Sullivan, 1989;Talwar & Lee, 2002;Talwar, Murphy, & Lee, 2007). Even preschool children are sometimes able to conceal their lies regarding transgressions (e.g., Crossman & Lewis, 2006;Lewis et al, 1989;Talwar & Lee, 2002), but school-age children control their nonverbal behavior and mask deception with positive facial expressions (e.g., Feldman, Jenkins, & Popoola, 1979;Morency & Krauss, 1982) better than younger children do. These findings suggest that, as age increases, deception cues are likely to decrease, although both children and adults strive to conceal lies by inhibiting non-verbal behaviors (Stromwall, Hartwig, & Granhag, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-verbal behavior of children who disclose or do not disclose child abuse in investigative interviews

Katz¹,

Hershkowitz²,

Malloy³

et al. 2012

Child Abuse & Neglect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjective: The study focused on children's nonverbal behavior in investigative interviews exploring suspicions of child abuse. The key aims were to determine whether non-verbal behavior in the pre-substantive phases of the interview predicted whether or not children would disclose the alleged abuse later in the interview and to identify differences in the nonverbal behaviors of disclosing and non-disclosing children. Method: We studied DVD-recorded interviews of 40 alleged victims of child abuse. In all cases, there was external evidence strongly suggesting that abuse had occurred. However, half of the children disclosed abuse when interviewed using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol, whereas the other half did not. Two raters, unaware whether or not the children disclosed, independently coded the videotapes for nonverbal indices of positive and negative emotions, stress, and physical disengagement in each 15-second unit of the introductory, rapport building, and substantive interview phases. Results: Indicators of stress and physical disengagement increased as the interviews progressed while indices of positive emotions decreased. Non-disclosers showed proportionately more physical disengagement than disclosers in both the introductory and substantive phases. Conclusions: Awareness of non-verbal behavior may help investigators identify reluctant children early in forensic interviews. Practice implications: There is substantial evidence that, when questioned by investigators, many children do not disclose that they have been abused. The early detection of reluctance to disclose may allow interviewers to alter their behavior, helping the children overcome their reluctance by providing non-suggestive support before the possibility of abuse is discussed. Of course, nonverbal behavior alone should not be used to assess children in investigative interviews. However, nonverbal cues may nonetheless provide additional information to interviewers and assist them in identifying reluctant children.

show abstract

“…It also focuses on whether observers can detect deception rather than whether there are differences between honest and deceptive displays. These results suggest that distinguishing between lies and truths in adults and children is of similar difficulty (Crossman & Lewis 2006).…”

Section: Plasticity Of Displaysmentioning

confidence: 77%

Genuine versus Deceptive Emotional Displays

Grose

2011

EPSA Philosophy of Science: Amsterdam 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to the explanation of human cooperative behaviour, examining the implications of Brian Skyrms' modelling of the prisoner's dilemma (PD). Augmenting a PD with signalling strategies promotes cooperation, but a challenge that must be addressed is what prevents signals being subverted by deceptive behaviour. Empirical results suggest that emotional displays can play a s ignalling role and, to some extent, are secure from subversion. I examine proximate explanations and then offer an evolutionary explanation for the translucency of emotional displays.Selection acts on the basis of lifetime fitness consequences and, crucially for my argument, the intensity of selection decreases over the course of a lifetime. Hence we tend to possess traits that promote survival when young and, with regard to emotional displays, translucency allows successful maturation over our protracted period of nurturing by close kin. This is due to the vital role played by emotional interactions in the normal cognitive and social development of Homo sapiens. The prisoner's dilemma, positive assortment and signalling.Evolutionary models of one-shot PDs clearly d emonstrate that where cooperators and defectors are paired randomly c ooperation is driven to e xtinction (Alexander 2007). Skyrms' conclusion on the PD is that positive assortment of cooperators can promote the evolution of cooperation (Skyrms 1996). That is, if cooperators interact with each other at high enough frequency above the random pairing rate, 100% cooperation is an equilibrium outcome, a claim that has been established by evolutionary game theorists across other disciplines. Indeed, it has been argued that many m odels of the evolution of altruism share an underlying mathematical structure-t hat of Hamilton's Price equation formulation of inclusive fitness theory. Hamilton's relatedness coefficient between individuals can be interpreted at a general level as the degree of positive assortment of types and need make no reference to common descent (McElreath & Boyd 2007). Interesting though this common mathematical form is, it is impossible to test the relationship of a model to actual strategic interactions without considering the mechanism that generates positive assortment. However, Skyrms is clear that his focus is only on the theoretical possibility of cooperation.Suppose that nature has somehow-I don't care how-arranged high correlation between like strategies among individuals playing the Prisoner's Dilemma. (Skyrms 2000: 280)

show abstract

Adults' ability to detect children's lying

Cited by 53 publications

References 32 publications

Detecting children’s lies: Are parents accurate judges of their own children’s lies?

Detecting children’s lies: Are parents accurate judges of their own children’s lies?

Non-verbal behavior of children who disclose or do not disclose child abuse in investigative interviews

Genuine versus Deceptive Emotional Displays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About