Admission of suspicion as a function of information source: Tip-off vs. situational cues

Two studies were run in which subjects received information about a fake opponent in a two-person game either from a confederate tip off or from situational cues designed to allow the subject to penetrate the deception unaided. In both experiments, subjects given the tip off reported less suspicion of the opponent than did those using situational cues. Probes were run to check tip-off information transmission in both experiments. In Experiment II a preinstruction manipulation was used to check for awareness of the actual purpose of the experiment and suspicion of the confederate tip off, but no evidence for these unwanted artifacts was found. The results suggest that subjects may be candid about their interpretations, at least if their suspicions do not derive from peers.