Academic journal article Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science

Let Me Inform You How to Tell a Convincing Story: CBCA and Reality Monitoring Scores as a Function of Age, Coaching, and Deception

Academic journal article Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science

Let Me Inform You How to Tell a Convincing Story: CBCA and Reality Monitoring Scores as a Function of Age, Coaching, and Deception

Article excerpt

Abstract

The first aim of this experiment was to examine whether being informed about a method of detecting deception called Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) would increase participants' CBCA scores when deceptive so that they might then be classified as truthful. The second aim was to investigate whether Reality Monitoring could be used as an alternative tool for verbal lie detection. The third aim was to examine whether participants' social skills (social anxiety, self-monitoring, and social adroitness) affected their CBCA scores. Participants (aged 6-8, 11-12,14-15, and undergraduates) participated in a "rubbing the blackboard" event. In a subsequent interview they told the truth or lied about the event, after they were or were not taught some CBCA criteria. Truth-tellers obtained higher CBCA scores than liars, and those who were informed about CBCA obtained higher scores than those who were not, except for the 6-8 year-olds. CBCA scores were also significantly correlated with social skills. Finally, Reality Monitoring was a useful alternative to CBCA for distinguishing between liars and truth-tellers.

Rsum

Le premier but de cette experience consistait a determiner si en connaissant une methode de detection de la tromperie appelee Criteria-Based Content Analysis (« analyse du contenu fondee sur des criteres ») (CBCA) les participants pourraient accroitre leurs scores CBCA lorsqu'on les trompait de sorte qu'ils pourraient ensuite etre classifies vrais. Le deuxieme but etait d etudier si le controle de la realite pouvait etre utilise comme outil de rechange pour la detection des mensonges verbaux. Le troisieme objectif consistait examiner si les aptitudes sociales des participants (ages de 6 a 8,11 a 12, 14 1 15 et le estudiants l'adresse sociale) influencaient leurs scores CBCA. Les participants (ages de 6 a 8, 11 a 12 15 et les estudiants de premier cycle) ont participe a un evenement « effacer le tableau noir ». Dans une entrevue subsequente ils ont dit la verite ou ils ont menti au sujet de l'evenement, apres qu'on leur ait eu enseigne ou non certains criteres de la CBCA. Les participants qui avaient dit la verite ont obtenu des scores CBCA plus eleves que ceux qui avaient menti et ceux qui connaissaient la CBCA ont obtenu des scores plus eleves que ceux qui ne la connaissaient pas, sauf pour le groupe des 6 a 8 ans. Les scores de la CBCA ont une correlation significative avec les aptitudes sociales. En dernier lieu, le controle de la realite s' est avere une option de rechange utile la CBCA pour distinguer entre les menteurs et ceux qui disaient la verite.

To date, Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) a systematic assessment of the credibility of written statements - is probably the most popular instrument to assess the veracity of written statements (Vrij, 2000). CBCA is a systematic assessment of the credibility of written statements. Steller and Kohnken (1989) compiled a list of 19 criteria that had been used in such assessments. CBCA is based on the hypothesis, originally stated by Undeutsch (1967), that a statement derived from memory of an actual experience differs in content and quality from a statement based on invention or fantasy. This is known as the Undeutsch Hypothesis (Steller, 1989). The presence of each criterion strengthens the hypothesis that the account is based on genuine personal experience. Kohnken (1989, 1996, 1999, 2002) presented theoretical support for the Undeutsch hypothesis and proposed that both cognitive and motivational factors influence CBCA scores.

With regard to cognitive factors, it is assumed that, relative to those who fabricate a story, someone who actually experienced an event would be able to produce descriptions about this event. These descriptions include more CBCA criteria, as some criteria (e.g., unstructured production, contextual embedding, reproduction of speech, unusual details, etc.) are believed to be very difficult for people to fabricate. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.