Expect the Unexpected? Variations in Question Type Elicit Cues to Deception in Joint Interviewer Contexts

We examined the effect of (i) a second interviewer's demeanour and (ii) asking expected and unexpected questions on cues to deception. We predicted that liars compared with truth tellers would provide more detail to expected questions and less detail to unexpected questions, particularly when the second interviewer is supportive. Liars prepare answers for expected questions, and a supportive interviewer will encourage them to provide more detail. By definition, liars have not prepared answers for unexpected questions, and their answers to such questions will be less detailed. Participants (N = 168) appeared before two interviewers: The first asked all the questions, and the second remained silent. The second interviewer exhibited either a supportive or a neutral demeanour. As predicted, liars provided more detail to expected questions and less detail to unexpected questions, particularly when the second interviewer was supportive. In conclusion, a supportive second interviewer elicits cues to deceit. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Richard (Routley) Sylvan: Writings on Logic and Metaphysics

Richard Sylvan (né Routley) was one of Australasia's most prolific and systematic philosophers. Though known for his innovative work in logic and metaphysics, the astonishing breadth of his philosophical endeavours included almost all reaches of philosophy. Taking the view that very basic assumptions of mainstream philosophy were fundamentally mistaken, he sought radical change across a wide range of theories. However, his view of the centrality of logic and recognition of the possibilities opened up by logical innovation in the fundamental areas of metaphysics resulted in his working primarily in these two, closely connected fields. It is this work in logic and metaphysics that is the main focus of what follows.     

Ingroup identification moderates stereotype change in reaction to ingroup deviance

An experiment (N = 98) investigated the moderating effect of ingroup identification on reactions to deviant ingroup members. We measured psychology students' level of identification with the group ‘psychologists’ and presented them with information about either a normative or deviant psychologist. Participants completed an ingroup stereotype measure either before or after reading about and evaluating the target psychologist. High identifiers expressed a more positive stereotype of the ingroup after, compared to before, reading about a deviant ingroup member. High identifiers also expressed a more positive stereotype of the ingroup after reading about a deviant than after reading about a normative ingroup member. By contrast, low identifiers' stereotype judgements were relatively unaffected by the target information. The target evaluation ratings indicate that high identifiers were more positive than low identifiers towards the normative ingroup member, but were more negative than low identifiers towards the deviant. The results point to the greater motivational demands on high identifiers to maintain a positive image of the group. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The “True” Romantic: Benevolent Sexism and Paternalistic Chivalry

Previous research has shown that individuals high in benevolent sexism positively evaluate women who conform to traditional gender roles (e.g., Glick, Diebold, Bailey-Warner, & Zhu, 1997). In the current study, male and female participants completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) and a new measure of paternalistic chivalry, that is, attitudes that are both courteous and considerate to women but place restrictions on behavior considered appropriate for women during courtship. Consistent with our hypotheses, benevolent sexism was significantly positively related to paternalistic chivalry. Hostile sexism and participant sex were unrelated to paternalistic chivalry.     

Sex-role stereotypes of feminists and nonfeminists

In light of recent attempts by feminists to upgrade the status of women by stressing the positive aspects of femininity, a comparison of sex-role stereotyping by women who endorse women's liberation with those who do not was made. Feminists showed a more positive perception of women; both groups stressed positive feminine traits in describing an ideal woman, but feminists would like to see more dominance in women. Two negative stereotypes, not previously documented, emerged from this analysis: the depiction of men as cooler, more boastful, awkward, and insensitive by the feminists and women's liberationists as more boastful, excitable, and unattractive by the nonfeminists.