We investigated automatic retrieval of the knowledge of having lied or having told the truth to a question, depending on (a) the quality of the statement (true vs. false response) and (b) the overall proportion of (dis-)honest responses. We therefore manipulated the proportion of lies and truths being told in an oral interview. Automatic retrieval of this meta-knowledge was assessed with a categorisation task, where the probe words dishonest and honest had to be classified, while questions from the interview served as task-irrelevant prime stimuli. Results revealed an automatic retrieval of knowledge about having lied to a question only for participants who had told few lies in the interview, but not for those who had told many lies. No retrieval effects were obtained regarding questions that had been answered truthfully. These findings suggest a combined influence of quality and quantity of dishonest statements on automatic memory retrieval, thereby being in accordance with recent accounts of action control.
DenkingerB.KoutstaalW. (2009). Perceive-decide-act, perceive-decide-act: How abstract is repetition-related decision learning?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 742–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015263
2.
DePauloB. M.KashyD. A.KirkendolS. E.WyerM. M.EpsteinJ. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979–995. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.979
FringsC.HommelB.KochI.RothermundK.DignathD.GiesenC.. . .PhilippA. (2020). Binding and retrieval in action control (BRAC). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24, 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.02.004
5.
FringsC.KochI.RothermundK.DignathD.GiesenC.HommelB.. . .PhilippA. (2020). Merkmalsintegration und Abruf als wichtige Prozesse der automatischen Handlungssteuerung—eine Paradigmen-übergreifende Perspektive [Feature integration and retrieval in action control-a perspective across paradigms]. Psychologische Rundschau, 71, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000423
6.
FringsC.RothermundK. (2011). To be or not to be. . .included in an event file: Integration and retrieval of distractors in stimulus-response episodes is influenced by perceptual grouping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1209–1227. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023915
7.
FringsC.RothermundK. (2017). How perception guides action: Figure-ground segmentation modulates integration of context features into S-R episodes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1720–1729. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000403
GuX.MulderJ.HoijtinkH. (2018). Approximated adjusted fractional Bayes factors: A general method for testing informative hypotheses. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 71, 229–261. http://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12110
10.
HoijtinkH. (2012). Informative hypotheses: Theory and practice for behavioral and social scientists. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
11.
HommelB. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/713756773
HuntR. R. (2006). The concept of distinctiveness in memory research. In HuntR. R.WorthenJ. B. (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 3–25). Oxford University Press.
14.
JarmaszJ.HollandsJ. G. (2009). Confidence intervals in repeated-measures designs: The number of observations principle. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(2), 124–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014164
15.
KoranyiN.SchreckenbachF.RothermundK. (2015). The implicit cognition of lying: Knowledge about having lied to a question is retrieved automatically. Social Cognition, 33, 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2015.33.1.67
16.
LiesefeldH. R.JanczykM. (2019). Combining speed and accuracy to control for speed-accuracy trade-offs(?). Behavior Research Methods, 51, 40–60. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1076-x
MaxwellS. E.DelaneyH. D. (1990). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective. Wadsworth.
19.
RothermundK.WenturaD.De HouwerJ. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.482
20.
SchmidtJ. R.De HouwerJ.RothermundK. (2016). The Parallel Episodic Processing (PEP) model 2.0: A single computational model of stimulus-response binding, contingency learning, power curves, and mixing costs. Cognitive Psychology, 91, 82–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.10.004.
21.
SchreckenbachF.RothermundK.KoranyiN. (2019). And remember the truth that once was spoken: Knowledge of having disclosed private information to a stranger is retrieved automatically. Experimental Psychology, 66, 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000427
22.
SerotaK. B.LevineT. R.:.PosterF. J. (2010). The prevalence of lying in America: Three studies of self-reported lies. Human Communication Research, 36, 2–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01366.x
23.
SporerS. L.SchwandtB. (2006). Paraverbal indicators of deception: A meta-analytic synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 421–446. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1190
24.
SporerS. L.SchwandtB. (2007). Moderators of nonverbal indicators of deception. A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.13.1.1
25.
TukeyJ. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley.
26.
TulvingE.ThomsonD. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020071
27.
von RestorffH. (1933). Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld [The effects of field formation in the trace field]. Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409636
28.
VrijA.GranhagP. A.PorterS. (2010). Pitfalls and opportunities in nonverbal and verbal lie detection. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11, 89–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100610390861
29.
WalczykJ. J.HarrisL. L.DuckT. K.MulayD. (2014). A social-cognitive framework for understanding serious lies: Activation-decision-construction-action theory. New Ideas in Psychology, 34, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2014.03.001
30.
WalczykJ. J.RoperK. S.SeemannE.HumphreyA. M. (2003). Cognitive mechanisms underlying lying to questions: Response time as a cue to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 755–774. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.914
31.
WiswedeD.KoranyiN.MüllerF.LangnerO.RothermundK. (2013). Validating the truth of propositions: Behavioral and ERP indicators of truth evaluation processes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8, 647–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss04
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
