Does Watching “Lie to Me” Affect Viewers’ Ability to Detect Lies? Rebecca Adleberg, B.S. & Jeff Kukucka, Ph.D.

Abstract

Method

Discussion

Participants judged the veracity of taped statements before and after watching the TV show “Lie to Me,” which we framed as fictional, accurate, or neither. Although participants remained poor at detecting lies, watching the show decreased trust. Confidence in one’s ability changed as a function of how the show was framed.

N = 39 participants were assigned to one of three cells in a 3 (Framing) X 2 (Time) mixed design…

o Watching

GDRT Survey

Participants completed a 10-item survey that assessed their beliefs about how liars behave (Global Deception Research Team, 2006).

Judge Videos

Participants watched a counterbalanced set of four videotaped statements. After each video, they judged the person’s veracity (i.e., truth/lie), and rated their confidence in this judgment (1-7).

Framing Manip.

By random assignment, participants read an article that described Lie to Me as scientifically accurate, fictional, or neither (control).

Lie to Me

All participants watched the pilot episode of Lie to Me.

• Global Deception Research Team (2006): o Across

75 countries, most people believe that liars avoid eye contact and fidget.

More Videos

o Looked

at 158 nonverbal cues, none of which reliably predicted deception.

Kearns & Young (2014): Watching 24 increased support for torture.

• Levine et al. (2010): o

People who watched Lie to Me were more skeptical, but not more accurate.

• Butler et al. (2009): o

Warning viewers about inaccuracies can inoculate them against misinformation.

3 2.5 2 1.5 1

Accurate Control Fictional

Mean Confidence Rating (1-7)

# of Accurate Judgments (out of 4)

o

Mutz & Nir (2010): Watching Law & Order affected support for death penalty.

o Poor

accuracy-confidence calibration can have serious real-world consequences.

3 2.5 2 1.5 1

Accurate Control Fictional

Before Show

After Show

References

Before Show

5.75 5.5 5.25 5 4.75 4.5 4.25

Accurate Control Fictional

4

0.5

0.5

these participants rejected the idea that the show was entirely fictional.

6

3.5

3.5

# of Truth Judgments (out of 4)

o

• Accurate and Control groups became more confident – but not more accurate!

• Beliefs about lie detection may affect support for government programs (e.g., SPOT).

Results

are universally poor lie detectors.

• Fictional media can impact beliefs/actions.

showed a “truth bias” before watching Lie to Me, but not after.

• Fictional group became slightly less confident.

Participants watched another set of four videos, and for each, they judged its veracity and rated their confidence.

• Bond & DePaulo (2006, 2008) meta-analyses: tend to show a “truth bias.”

o Participants

o Perhaps

• DePaulo et al. (2003) meta-analysis:

o People

a fictional show influenced viewers’ real-world deception judgments.

• Replicated Levine et al. (2010):

Introduction

o People

• Canter & Youngs (2003): “Hollywood effect”

After Show

Before Show

After Show

Truth Judgments

Judgment Accuracy

Judgment Confidence

Main effect of Time, p < .001.

No effects, all ps > .16.

Participants judged fewer videos as truthful before watching the show (64.7%) than after (44.9%).

All groups were equally poor at lie detection before (56.4%) and after (48.1%) the show.

Marginal Framing X Time interaction, p = .053, η2p = .15

People became more or less confident, depending on how the show was framed.

Bond, C. F., Jr., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214-234. Bond, C. F., Jr., & DePaulo, B. M. (2008). Individual differences in judging deception: Accuracy and bias. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 477-492. Butler, A. C., Zaromb, F. M., Lyle, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2009). Using popular films to enhance classroom learning: The good, the bad, and the interesting. Psychological Science, 20, 1161-1168. Canter, D., & Youngs, D. (2003). Beyond ‘offender profiling’: The need for an investigative psychology. In D. Carson & R. Bull (eds.), Handbook of psychology in legal contexts (2nd ed.), pp. 171-205. Chichester, UK: Wiley. DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74-118. Global Deception Research Team. (2006). A world of lies. Kearns, E. M., & Young, J. K. (2014). If torture is wrong, what about 24? Torture and the Hollywood effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC. Levine, T. R., Serota, K. B., & Shulman, H. C. (2010). The impact of Lie to Me on viewers’ actual ability to detect deception. Communication Research, 37, 847-856. Mutz, D. C., & Nir, L. (2010). Not necessarily the news: Does fictional television influence real-world policy preferences? Mass Communication and Society, 13, 196-217.

Contact Info Rebecca Adleberg

[email protected]