Ecological Validity and Deception Detection Research Design

References

• Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(416, whole), 1–70.
   Google Scholar
• Blair, J. P., Levine, T. R., & Shaw, A. J. (2010). Content in context improves deception detection accuracy. Human Communication Research, 36, 423–442. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01382.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, C. F., Jr., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, C. F., Jr., Howard, A. R., Hutchison, J. L., & Masip, J. (2013). Overlooking the obvious: Incentives to lie. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 35, 212–221. doi:10.1080/01973533.2013.764302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buller, D. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6, 203–242. doi:10.1111/comt.1996.6.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., Ebesu, A. S., & Rockwell, P. (1994). Interpersonal deception: V. Accuracy in deception detection. Communication Monographs, 61, 303–325. doi:10.1080/03637759409376340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Clare, D. D., & Levine, T. R. (2015). Spontaneous, unprompted veracity judgments. Unpublished, Washington DC.
   Google Scholar
• DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–118. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunbar, N. E., Jensen, M. L., Burgoon, J. K., Kelly, K. M., Harrison, K. J., Adame, B. J., & Bernard, D. R. (2015). Effects of veracity, modality, and sanctioning on credibility assessment during mediated and unmediated interviews. Communication Research, 42 649–674.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception. Psychiatry, 32, 88–106. doi:10.1080/00332747.1969.11023575
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeley, T. H., & deTurck, M. A. (1998). The behavioral correlates of sanctioned and unsanctioned deceptive communication. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 189–204. doi:10.1023/A:1022966505471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granhag, P. A., & Hartwig, M. (2008). A new theoretical perspective on deception detection: On the psychology of instrumental mind reading. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 189–200. doi:10.1080/10683160701645181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granhag, P. A., Stromwal, L. A., & Hartwig, M. (2007). The SUE technique: The way to interview to detect deception. Forensic Update, 88, 25–29.
   Google Scholar
• Hartwig, M., & Bond, C. F., Jr. (2014). Lie detection from multiple cues: Meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology. doi:10.1002/acp.3052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2010). A few transparent liars. In: C. Salmon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 34. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2014a). Truth-Default Theory (TDT): A theory of human deception and deception detection. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 378–392. doi:10.1177/0261927X14535916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2014b). Active deception detection. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 122–128. doi:10.1177/2372732214548863
   Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2015). New and improved accuracy findings in deception detection research. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 1–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Ali, M., Dean, M., Abdulla, R., & Garcia-Ruano, K. (2016). Toward a pancultural typology of deception motives. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 45, 1–12. doi:10.1080/17475759.2015.1137079
   Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Clare, D., & Blair, J. P. (2014). Diagnostic utility: Experimental demonstrations and replications of powerful question effects and smaller question by experience interactions in high stake deception detection. Human Communication Research, 40, 262–289. doi:10.1111/hcre.12021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Clare, D., Blair, J. P., McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K., & Park, H. S. (2014). Expertise in deception detection involves actively prompting diagnostic information rather than passive behavioral observation. Human Communication Research, 40, 442–462. doi:10.1111/hcre.2014.40.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Clare, D. D., Green, T., Serota, K. B., & Park, H. S. (2014). The effects of truth-lie base rate on interactive deception detection accuracy. Human Communication Research, 40, 350–372. doi:10.1111/hcre.12027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Kim, R. K., & Blair, J. P. (2010). (In)accuracy at detecting true and false confessions and denials: An initial test of a projected motive model of veracity judgments. Human Communication Research, 36, 81–101. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01369.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Kim, R. K., & Hamel, L. M. (2010). People lie for a reason: An experimental test of the principle of veracity. Communication Research Reports, 27, 271–285. doi:10.1080/08824096.2010.496334
   Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Kim, R. K., Park, H. S., & Hughes, M. (2006). Deception detection accuracy is a predictable linear function of message veracity base-rate: A formal test of Park and Levine’s probability model. Communication Monographs, 73, 243–260. doi:10.1080/03637750600873736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Park, H. S., & McCornack, S. A. (1999). Accuracy in detecting truths and lies: Documenting the “veracity effect.”. Communication Monographs, 66, 125–144. doi:10.1080/03637759909376468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Serota, K. B., Shulman, H., Clare, D.D., Park, H. S., Shaw, A. S., Shim,J. C., & Lee, J. H. (2011). Sender demeanor: Individual differences in sender believability have a powerful impact on deception detection judgments. Human Communication Research, 37, 377–403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Shaw, A., & Shulman, H. (2010). Increasing deception detection accuracy with strategic questioning. Human Communication Research, 36, 216–231. doi:10.1111/hcre.2010.36.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masip, J., & Herrero, C. (2015). Police detection of deception: Beliefs about behavioral cues to deception are strong even though contextual evidence is more useful. Journal of Communication, 65, 125–145. doi:10.1111/jcom.12135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCornack, S. A. (1992). Information manipulation theory. Communication Monographs, 59, 1–16. doi:10.1080/03637759209376245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCornack, S. A. (1997). The generation of deceptive messages: Laying the groundwork for a viable theory of interpersonal deception. In: J. O. Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 91–126). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K., Paik, J. E., Wiser, A. M., & Zhu, X. (2014). Information manipulation theory 2: A propositional theory of deceptive discourse production. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 348–377. doi:10.1177/0261927X14534656
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. R., & Stiff, J. B. (1993). Deceptive communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ormerod, T. C., & Dando, C. J. (2015). Finding a needle in a haystack: Toward a psychologically informed method for aviation security screening. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 76–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, H. S., & Levine, T. R. (2001). A probability model of accuracy in deception detection experiments. Communication Monographs, 68, 201–210. doi:10.1080/03637750128059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, H. S., & Levine, T. R. (2017). The effects of truth-lie base-rates on deception detection accuracy in Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 27, 554–562. doi:10.1080/01292986.2017.1334074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, H. S., Levine, T. R., McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K., & Ferrara, M. (2002). How people really detect lies. Communication Monographs, 69, 144–157. doi:10.1080/714041710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhard, M., Sporer, S. L., & Scharmach, M. (2013). Perceived familiarity with a judgmental situation improves lie detection ability. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 72, 43–52. doi:10.1024/1421-0185/a000098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serota, K. B., & Levine, T. R. (2015). A few prolific liars: Variation in the prevalence of lying. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 138–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serota, K. B., Levine, T. R., & Boster, F. J. (2010). The prevalence of lying in America: Three studies of reported deception. Human Communication Research, 36, 1–24. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01366.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ten Brinke, L., Stimson, D., & Carney, D. R. (2014). Some evidence for unconscious lie detection. Psychological Science, 25, 1098–1105. doi:10.1177/0956797614524421
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Swol, L. M., Malhotra, D., & Braun, M. T. (2012). Deception and its detection: Effects of monetary incentives and personal relationship history. Communication Research, 39, 217–238. doi:10.1177/0093650210396868
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Vrij, A. (2015). A cognitive approach to lie detection. In: P. A. Granhag, A. Vrij, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Deception detection: Current challenges and new approaches (pp. 205–229). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In: L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 14, pp. 1–59). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar