The perceived honesty of parole clients in actual parole interviews was found to be related to both the content of clients' statements and clients' nonverbal behaviors during the interviews. Contrary to evidence from parole hearings in California, clients' perceived honesty appeared to have an effect on interviewers' parole decision.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ekman, P. , & Friesen, W. V.Detecting deception from the body or face. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 288-298.
2.
Frankel, A. , & Morris, W.Testifying in one's own defense: The ingratiator's dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 475-480.
3.
Freud, S.Fragment of an analysis of a case of hysteria (1905). In Collected papers, Vol. 3, New York: Basic Books, 1959.
4.
Garber, R. M. , & Maslach, C.The parole hearing: Decision or justification?Law and Human Behavior, 1977, 1, 261-281.
5.
Knapp, M. L. , Hart, R. P., & Dennis, H. S.An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 1974, 1, 15-29.
6.
Kraut, R. E.Verbal and nonverbal cues in the perception of lying . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 380-391.
7.
McClintock, C. C. , & Hunt, R. C.Nonverbal indicators of affect and deception in an interview setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1975, S, 54-67.
8.
Mehrabian, A.Nonverbal betrayal of feeling . Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1971, 5, 64-73.
9.
Sorrentino, R. M. & Boutillier, R. G.The effect of quantity and quality of verbal interaction on ratings of leadership ability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1975, 11, 403-411.
