1 / 18

Cross-Cultural Judgments of Deception

Cross-Cultural Judgments of Deception. Charles F. Bond, Jr. Texas Christian University . Deception. Behaviors. Beliefs. Judgments. Deceptive Behaviors. ( DePaulo et al, Psychological Bulletin, 2003). 120 studies / 158 behaviors 4992 participants 25% non–U.S. .

sahara
Download Presentation

Cross-Cultural Judgments of Deception

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cross-Cultural Judgments of Deception Charles F. Bond, Jr. Texas Christian University

  2. Deception Behaviors Beliefs Judgments

  3. Deceptive Behaviors (DePaulo et al, Psychological Bulletin, 2003) • 120 studies / 158 behaviors • 4992 participants • 25% non–U.S.

  4. Best Cues for Lie Detection (DePaulo et al, 2003) Audible distancing Ambivalence Lack of detail Uncertainty 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percentage Accuracy

  5. Deception Behaviors Beliefs

  6. Beliefs about Deception (Many researchers et Bond, In progress) • Q : “How can you tell when people are lying?” • 56 countries • 38 languages

  7. Beliefs in 56 Nations

  8. Most Common Belief % of Responses

  9. Also Common % of Responses

  10. Deception Behaviors Beliefs Judgments

  11. Within-Culture Judgments (Bond & DePaulo, In progress) • 208 studies • 20,000 participants • 22% non–U.S.

  12. Within-Culture Accuracy 54.07% Non-U.S. U.S. Number of Studies 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percentage Accuracy

  13. Language differences Nonverbal differences Suspicions Cross-Cultural Challenges

  14. A Three-Nation Study (Bond & Atoum, 2000) Liars India Jordan U.S. India Jordan U.S. Judges

  15. Accuracy of Lie Detection Own Nation Other Nation Audio Video AV Audio Video AV

  16. Inter-judge Agreement Audio Video AV Audio Video AV Within Nation Between Nation

  17. Screening will entail deception judgments. These judgments will not be accurate. Eye contact is uninformative. The voice may be more informative. Four Conclusions

  18. Country Collaborator Acknowledgements Argentina S. Tifner Australia K. Williams Austria M. Voracek Brazil M. Pereira Burkina faso D. Donatien Cameroon T. Tchombe Canada K. Lee Chile M. Koljatic China Y. Zhang Colombia O. Rodriguez Croatia I. Sverko Cyprus A. Kapardis Czech Rep. I. Stuchlikova Domin. Rep. C. Matuk France P. Banton Georgia G. Nizharadze Germany G. Koehnken Ghana S. Reynolds Greece F. Kukkinaki Indonesia N. Hasanat Iran H. Bahrami Ireland J. Horgan Israel J. Kurman Italy L. Caso Japan T. Oka Jordan A. Atoum Kenya R. Rono Lithuania R. Simulioniene Malta R. Holland Mexico C. Benjet Micronesia R. Churney Moldova C. Platon Nepal S. Niraula Netherlands H. Merckelbach New Zealand L. Johnston Norway A. Melinder Pakistan F. Ahmad Phillipines C. Conaco Poland B. Pawlowski Portugal F. Neto Romania I. Roxana Russia D. Khalturina Samoa M. Kerslake Slovakia L. Lovas Slovenia V. Rus South Africa C. Tredoux Spain J. Masip Sri Lanka R. Gunawardhane Sweden M. Hartwig Taiwan T. Huang TrinidadTobago D. Chadee Turkey M. Ker-Dincer U.A.E. M. Abu-Hilal United Kingdom A. Vrij U.S.A. B. DePaulo U.S.A. S. Rao Yugoslavia A. Kostik

More Related