Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 23, 2026

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime
Published on: May 3, 2016
It's the deceiver, not the receiver: No individual differences when detecting deception in a foreign and a native
Marvin K H Law1, Simon A Jackson1, Eugene Aidman1
1School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract:
Individual differences in lie detection remain poorly understood. Bond and DePaulo's meta-analysis examined judges (receivers) who were ascertaining lies from truths and senders (deceiver) who told these lies and truths. Bond and DePaulo found that the accuracy of detecting deception depended more on the characteristics of senders rather than the judges' ability to detect lies/truths. However, for many studies in this meta-analysis, judges could hear and understand senders. This made language comprehension a potential confound. This paper presents the results of two studies. Extending previous work, in Study 1, we removed language comprehension as a potential confound by having English-speakers (N = 126, mean age = 19.86) judge the veracity of German speakers (n = 12) in a lie detection task. The twelve lie-detection stimuli included emotional and non-emotional content, and were presented in three modalities-audio only, video only, and audio and video together. The intelligence (General, Auditory, Emotional) and personality (Dark Triads and Big 6) of participants was also assessed. In Study 2, a native German-speaking sample (N = 117, mean age = 29.10) were also tested on a similar lie detection task to provide a control condition. Despite significantly extending research design and the selection of constructs employed to capture individual differences, both studies replicated Bond and DePaulo's findings. The results of Study1 indicated that removing language comprehension did not amplify individual differences in judge's ability to ascertain lies from truths. Study 2 replicated these results confirming a lack of individual differences in judge's ability to detect lies. The results of both studies suggest that Sender (deceiver) characteristics exerted a stronger influence on the outcomes of lie detection than the judge's attributes.
More Related Videos
09:09Foreign Accent and Forensic Speaker Identification in Voice Lineups: The Influence of Acoustic Features Based on Prosody
Published on: September 27, 2024
05:48Memorization-Based Training and Testing Paradigm for Robust Vocal Identity Recognition in Expressive Speech Using Event-Related Potentials Analysis
Published on: August 9, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Self-Discrepancy Theory
Fundamental Attribution Error
Deindividuation
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Language and Cognition
Understanding Deception