Assessing cognitive load using oculometrics to identify deceit during interviews

Lying requires a long‐term memory search and is a cognitive load task. Telling a spontaneous lie is associated with a higher cognitive load compared with the truth, although when memories are planned before telling a lie, the cognitive load can be less compared with the truth; therefore, telling a spontaneous lie could be associated with a higher cognitive load compared with a planned lie. In this study, we examined cognitive load, as measured through oculometrics, to identify deceit in interviews. Twenty‐four subjects were questioned, and their answers classified as spontaneous lies, planned lies, and truths. Results show that saccades and fixations were associated with a higher cognitive load when telling spontaneous lies compared with telling truths. Blinks and pupillometry show that subjects require greater cognitive load when telling truths compared with planned lies. Finally, telling spontaneous lies required higher cognitive load compared with planned lies, as assessed by blinks.     

The ethics of creative accounting

Creative accounting, which generally involves the preparation of financial statements with the intention of misleading readers of those statements, is prima facie a form oflying, as defined by Bok.¹ This paper starts by defining and illustrating creative accounting. It examines and rejects the arguments for considering creative accounting, in spite of its deceptive intent, as not being a form of lying. It then examines the ethical issues raised by creative accounting, in the light of the literature on the ethics of lying. This literature includes the evaluation of various excuses and justifications for lying, and these are examined here in relation to creative accounting. It is concluded that even in circumstances in which creative accounting would arguably serve a worthy purpose, that purpose would be at least as well served by honest communication.     

WHEN TO BEAR FALSE WITNESS: AN EVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF HONESTY AND DECEIT AMONG COMMERCIAL FISHERS

Abstract. This paper uses an evolutionary perspective to identify variables influencing compliance with moral codes about honest communication. Data on over one thousand radio conversations among lobster fishers in two harbors in Maine are compared in regard to the sharing of information. The sharing of accurate information is found to be significantly more frequent in the harbor that is more integrated by reciprocally altruistic relationships. This is consistent with the view that moral systems are systems of indirect reciprocity, but it also suggests that humans have evolved to base their compliance with moral codes on cues from their social environment.     

Understanding reactions to deceit

Reactions to discovered deceit have important consequences politically, socially, etc. We present and test the Social Norm Model (SNM) of the tolerance of deceit. By it, observers of lies intuitively put themselves in the position of the liar. From that perspective, their tolerance, ranging from condemnation to acceptance, is determined by how much the social norms of reciprocity and social responsibility are perceived to be upheld or violated overall. Tolerance encourages identification with the liar. Condemnation fosters dis-identification. To test the SNM, 116 participants recounted lies they told and were told to them they felt were justified and others they regretted/condemned. The social impact of the deceit, the obligation for honesty, and other relevant constructs were assessed for each. Analyses support the model. We illustrate the SNM's applied value for understanding public reaction to the lying of politicians.