The Distinction Between Lying and Pretending

Taylor, Marjorie; Lussier, Gretchen L.; Maring, Bayta L.

doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0403_04

Cited by 24 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Arico & Fallis, in press;Carson, 2006;Coleman & Kay, 1981;Lee & Ross, 1997;Lindskold & Han, 1986;Mahon, 2008;Peterson, 1995;Taylor et al, 2003;Vrij, 2008). It is possible that virtually all of our participants were badly confused about the nature of lying.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Both children and adults view deceptive intent as necessary for lying (Lee & Ross, 1997;Lindskold & Han, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.01.007 0010-0277/Ó 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1986; Peterson, 1995;Taylor, Lussier, & Maring, 2003). But no empirical studies have shown that lying does not require objective falsehood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The truth about lying

Turri

2015

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The standard view in social science and philosophy is that lying does not require the liar's assertion to be false, only that the liar believes it to be false. We conducted three experiments to test whether lying requires falsity. Overall, the results suggest that it does. We discuss some implications for social scientists working on social judgments, research on lie detection, and public moral discourse.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The truth about lying

Turri

2015

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With respect to labeling of true and false statements as “truth” and “lie” (Task B), better performance on “truth” might reflect uncertainty whether the false statements were indeed “lies,” since those statements could have been mistakes or pretense. However, this is unlikely because research examining children’s understanding of distinctions between lies and mistakes (Siegal & Peterson, 1996, 1998) or pretense (Taylor, Lussier, & Maring, 2003; cf. Dias & Harris, 1990) has shown that children presume that false statements are lies and tend to require strong contextual cues before inferring otherwise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Young children’s competency to take the oath: Effects of task, maltreatment, and age.

Lyon

Carrick

Quas

2010

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined maltreated and non-maltreated children’s (N = 183) emerging understanding of “truth” and “lie,” terms about which they are quizzed to qualify as competent to testify. Four- to six-year-old children were asked to accept or reject true and false (T/F) statements, label T/F statements as the “truth” or “a lie,” label T/F statements as “good” or “bad,” and label “truth” and “lie” as “good” or “bad.” The youngest children were at ceiling in accepting/rejecting T/F statements. The labeling tasks revealed improvement with age and children performed similarly across the tasks. Most children were better able to evaluate “truth” than “lie.” Maltreated children exhibited somewhat different response patterns, suggesting greater sensitivity to the immorality of lying.

show abstract

“…Although these two lines of research have yielded considerable insight into children's emerging understanding not only of the truth and lies but also of a broad range of related concepts, including inaccuracy, mistakes, jokes, and pretense (Hummer, Wimmer, & Antes, 1993; Koenig, Clement, & Harris, 2004; Siegal & Peterson, 1996, 1998; Sullivan, Winner, & Hopfield, 1995; Taylor, Lussier, & Maring, 2003), a basic question about children's conception of truthfulness and lying has gone unanswered—specifically, what role (if any) does the valence of the events about which children are questioned play in their early understanding?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does valence matter? Effects of negativity on children’s early understanding of the truth and lies

Wandrey

Quas

Lyon

2012

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early deceptive behavior often involves acts of wrongdoings on the part of children. As a result, it has often been assumed, although not tested directly, that children are better at identifying lies about wrongdoing than lies about other activities. We tested this assumption in two studies. In Study 1, 67 3- to 5-year-olds viewed vignettes in which a character truthfully or falsely claimed to have committed a good or bad act. Children were biased to label claims that the character had committed a good act as the truth and claims that the character had committed a bad act as lies. In Study 2, 51 4- to 6-year-olds viewed vignettes in which characters either admitted or denied committing a good or bad act. Children were better at identifying truth-tellers and liars when the acts were good. Results suggest that young children initially overgeneralize the concept of lie to include all negative acts and the concept of the truth to include all good acts and only gradually make a distinction between act valence and honesty. As a result, including wrongdoing in scenarios to test children's early understanding of the meaning of lying is likely to underestimate children's abilities.

show abstract

The Distinction Between Lying and Pretending

Cited by 24 publications

References 28 publications

The truth about lying

The truth about lying

Young children’s competency to take the oath: Effects of task, maltreatment, and age.

Does valence matter? Effects of negativity on children’s early understanding of the truth and lies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About