View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Investigating deception in second language speakers: Interviewee and assessor perspectives.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Investigating deception in second language speakers: Interviewee and assessor perspectives.
Authors: Akehurst, Lucy, Arnhold, Alina, Figueiredo, Isabel, Turtle, Sarah, Leach, Amy‐May
Source: Legal & Criminological Psychology. Sep2018, Vol. 23 Issue 2, p230-251. 22p. 6 Charts.
Subjects: Non-English speaking people, Native language, Respondents, Questionnaires, Truthfulness & falsehood, Psychology
Abstract: Purpose: The first of two experiments investigated the effect that speaking in a non‐native language has on interviewees’ perceptions of their interview experience. A second experiment investigated evaluators’ perceptions of the credibility of interviewees who spoke in their native or non‐native language. Method: For the first experiment, 52 participants told the truth or lied about their identity during a mock border control interview. All of the participants were interviewed in English, for half of the sample this was their native language, and for the other half of the sample English was not their native tongue. Post‐interview, all participants completed a self‐report questionnaire relating to their perceptions of their interview experience. For the second experiment, 128 participants evaluated the credibility of interviewees from the first experiment. The modality of presentation of interview clips was varied and included ‘Visual and Audio’, ‘Visual Only’, ‘Audio Only’, and ‘Transcript Only’. Results: Non‐native speakers were more likely than native speakers to report being nervous and cognitively challenged during their interviews and were more likely to monitor their own behaviour. Overall, evaluators were better able to distinguish between truth tellers and liars who were speaking in their native language than between truth tellers and liars who were non‐native speakers. Relative to native speakers, there was a smaller truth bias for evaluations of non‐native speakers. When evaluators were considering the non‐native speakers, they achieved higher discrimination accuracy when they were exposed to ‘Visual Only’ or ‘Transcript Only’ presentations than when they were shown the ‘Visual and Audio’ or ‘Audio Only’ interview clips. Conclusions: Self‐reported experiences of a mock border control interview differed dependent on whether interviewees were speaking in their native or non‐native language. Discrimination accuracy was better for native speakers than it was for non‐native speakers and was at its worst when evaluators heard the accents of the non‐native speakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Legal & Criminological Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 131205565
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Investigating deception in second language speakers: Interviewee and assessor perspectives.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Akehurst%2C+Lucy%22">Akehurst, Lucy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Arnhold%2C+Alina%22">Arnhold, Alina</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Figueiredo%2C+Isabel%22">Figueiredo, Isabel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Turtle%2C+Sarah%22">Turtle, Sarah</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Leach%2C+Amy‐May%22">Leach, Amy‐May</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Legal+%26+Criminological+Psychology%22">Legal & Criminological Psychology</searchLink>. Sep2018, Vol. 23 Issue 2, p230-251. 22p. 6 Charts.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Non-English+speaking+people%22">Non-English speaking people</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Native+language%22">Native language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Respondents%22">Respondents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questionnaires%22">Questionnaires</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Truthfulness+%26+falsehood%22">Truthfulness & falsehood</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology%22">Psychology</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Purpose: The first of two experiments investigated the effect that speaking in a non‐native language has on interviewees’ perceptions of their interview experience. A second experiment investigated evaluators’ perceptions of the credibility of interviewees who spoke in their native or non‐native language. Method: For the first experiment, 52 participants told the truth or lied about their identity during a mock border control interview. All of the participants were interviewed in English, for half of the sample this was their native language, and for the other half of the sample English was not their native tongue. Post‐interview, all participants completed a self‐report questionnaire relating to their perceptions of their interview experience. For the second experiment, 128 participants evaluated the credibility of interviewees from the first experiment. The modality of presentation of interview clips was varied and included ‘Visual and Audio’, ‘Visual Only’, ‘Audio Only’, and ‘Transcript Only’. Results: Non‐native speakers were more likely than native speakers to report being nervous and cognitively challenged during their interviews and were more likely to monitor their own behaviour. Overall, evaluators were better able to distinguish between truth tellers and liars who were speaking in their native language than between truth tellers and liars who were non‐native speakers. Relative to native speakers, there was a smaller truth bias for evaluations of non‐native speakers. When evaluators were considering the non‐native speakers, they achieved higher discrimination accuracy when they were exposed to ‘Visual Only’ or ‘Transcript Only’ presentations than when they were shown the ‘Visual and Audio’ or ‘Audio Only’ interview clips. Conclusions: Self‐reported experiences of a mock border control interview differed dependent on whether interviewees were speaking in their native or non‐native language. Discrimination accuracy was better for native speakers than it was for non‐native speakers and was at its worst when evaluators heard the accents of the non‐native speakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Legal & Criminological Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=131205565
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/lcrp.12127
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 22
        StartPage: 230
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Non-English speaking people
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Native language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Respondents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Questionnaires
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Truthfulness & falsehood
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychology
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Investigating deception in second language speakers: Interviewee and assessor perspectives.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Akehurst, Lucy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Arnhold, Alina
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Figueiredo, Isabel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Turtle, Sarah
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Leach, Amy‐May
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Text: Sep2018
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 13553259
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 23
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Legal & Criminological Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1