Linguistic Concreteness of True and False Intentions: A Mega-Analysis
| Autor: | Aldert Vrij, Warmelink L, Mac Giolla E, Sofia Calderon, Pär Anders Granhag, Karl Ask, Timothy J. Luke |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology
PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Forensic and Legal Psychology Computer science bepress|Law|Law and Psychology Concreteness Linguistics bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Cognitive Psychology PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology other bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Cognitive Psychology bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Personality and Social Contexts Mega analysis PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology |
| Popis: | Our aim was to examine how people communicate their true and false intentions. Based on construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), we predicted that statements of true intentions would be more concretely phrased than statements of false intentions. True intentions refer to more likely future events than false intentions, they should be mentally represented at a lower level of mental construal. This should be mirrored in more concrete language use. Transcripts of truthful and deceptive statements about intentions from six previous experimental studies (total N = 528) were analyzed using two automated verbal content analysis approaches: a folk-conceptual measure of concreteness (Brysbaert, Warriner, and Kuperman, 2014) and linguistic category model scoring (Seih, Beier, & Pennebaker, 2017). Contrary to our hypotheses, veracity did not predict statements’ concreteness scores, suggesting that automated verbal analysis of linguistic concreteness is not a viable deception-detection technique for intentions. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|