HELLO AND WELCOME TO DECEPTION RESEARCH
This page is a result of a joint project funded by EPSRC and conducted by Cambridge University, UCL, Newcastle University and the University of Portsmouth. Here you will find info on researchers and literature on deception. Simply follow the links above.
We are eager to hear from you if you wish to contribute to this repository.
Drop us a line at: david.modic[@]cl.cam.ac.uk (as is usual, remove the square brackets).
|Situational Determinants of the Acceptability of Telling Lies||
Abstract. It was tested whether the same factors people take into account when involved in the decision to lie apply to the evaluation of lies presented in scenarios. The scenarios represented 12 different situation categories formed by the crossing of the motive for lying (social. individualistic, egoistic), the relative importance of the situation (important matter, unimportant matter), and the closeness of the relation between the subject and the receiver of the lie (best friend, acquaintance).
|Truth and investment: Lies are told to those who care||
Abstract. Participants discussed paintings they liked and disliked with artists who were or were not personally invested in them. Participants were urged to be honest or polite or were given no special instructions. There were no conditions under which the artists received totally honest feedback about the paintings they cared about. As predicted by the defensibility postulate, participants stonewalled, amassed misleading evidence, and conveyed positive evaluations by implication. They also told some outright lies. But the participants also communicated clearly their relative degrees of liking for the different special paintings.
|Mapping the Moral Domain||
Abstract. The moral domain is broader than the empathy and justice concerns assessed by existing measures of moral competence, and it is not just a subset of the values assessed by value inventories. To fill the need for reliable and theoretically grounded measurement of the full range of moral concerns, we developed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire on the basis of a theoretical model of 5 universally available (but variably developed) sets of moral intuitions: Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, Ingroup/Loyalty, Author- ity/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity.
|A champagne lifestyle on a beer income: More personality predictors of fiscal irresponsibility||
Abstract: Using self-report data (N=348), we investigate whether Fiscal Irresponsibility is correlated with the personality variables of Deferred-Gratification, Impulsivity, Risk-Taking, Self-Regulation and Consideration of Future Consequences. A new Fiscal Irresponsibility scale was developed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The scale was shown to consist of two underlying factors interpreted as “irresponsible spending” and “financial planning” that were adequately accounted for by a global Fiscal Irresponsibility factor.
|Psychology of Scam Compliance||
Link to the zipped presentation (in PREZI. 56Mb. Works on Mac OS X and Windows).