The effect of individual differences in episodic future thought on credibility in occupation interviews

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Applied Cognitive Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-04 DOI:10.1002/acp.4172
Felicity O'Connell, Delyth Stone, Zarah Vernham, Paul Taylor, Lara Warmelink
{"title":"The effect of individual differences in episodic future thought on credibility in occupation interviews","authors":"Felicity O'Connell,&nbsp;Delyth Stone,&nbsp;Zarah Vernham,&nbsp;Paul Taylor,&nbsp;Lara Warmelink","doi":"10.1002/acp.4172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this paper, we describe three experiments that explored whether individual differences in episodic future thought (EFT) ability affects credibility when participants told the truth and lied about their occupation. Credibility was measured by the number of perceptual details, statement length, level of detail and plausibility in verbal accounts and sketches (Experiment 1) and by other participants' veracity judgments of the verbal accounts (Experiment 2) and sketches (Experiment 3). In Experiment 1, participants with higher EFT ability generated more detailed verbal accounts and more plausible sketches than those with lower EFT ability. In Experiments 2 and 3, EFT ability did not predict veracity judgements of the verbal accounts or sketches derived from Experiment 1. The findings across all experiments suggest that EFT ability affects the ability to generate credible accounts however, EFT ability does not affect credibility judgements.</p>","PeriodicalId":48281,"journal":{"name":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acp.4172","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.4172","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, we describe three experiments that explored whether individual differences in episodic future thought (EFT) ability affects credibility when participants told the truth and lied about their occupation. Credibility was measured by the number of perceptual details, statement length, level of detail and plausibility in verbal accounts and sketches (Experiment 1) and by other participants' veracity judgments of the verbal accounts (Experiment 2) and sketches (Experiment 3). In Experiment 1, participants with higher EFT ability generated more detailed verbal accounts and more plausible sketches than those with lower EFT ability. In Experiments 2 and 3, EFT ability did not predict veracity judgements of the verbal accounts or sketches derived from Experiment 1. The findings across all experiments suggest that EFT ability affects the ability to generate credible accounts however, EFT ability does not affect credibility judgements.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
偶发未来思维的个体差异对职业访谈可信度的影响
在本文中,我们介绍了三项实验,这些实验探讨了当被试者对自己的职业说真话和撒谎时,外显未来思维(EFT)能力的个体差异是否会影响可信度。可信度是通过口头叙述和草图(实验 1)中的感知细节数量、陈述长度、详细程度和可信度,以及其他参与者对口头叙述(实验 2)和草图(实验 3)的真实性判断来衡量的。在实验 1 中,EFT 能力较高的参与者比 EFT 能力较低的参与者产生了更详细的口头描述和更可信的草图。在实验 2 和实验 3 中,EFT 能力并不能预测实验 1 中对口头叙述或草图真实性的判断。所有实验的结果表明,EFT 能力影响产生可信叙述的能力,但 EFT 能力并不影响对可信性的判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Applied Cognitive Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Applied Cognitive Psychology seeks to publish the best papers dealing with psychological analyses of memory, learning, thinking, problem solving, language, and consciousness as they occur in the real world. Applied Cognitive Psychology will publish papers on a wide variety of issues and from diverse theoretical perspectives. The journal focuses on studies of human performance and basic cognitive skills in everyday environments including, but not restricted to, studies of eyewitness memory, autobiographical memory, spatial cognition, skill training, expertise and skilled behaviour. Articles will normally combine realistic investigations of real world events with appropriate theoretical analyses and proper appraisal of practical implications.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Constructed Response Paragraph Jigsaw Puzzle Test for Measuring Structure Building Ability Conspiracy Theory Mentality, Injustice and Tolerance of Ambiguity The Impact of Emotional Prosody on Online Learning in Undergraduates Ontological Confusion Reconsidered: Introducing the New Ontological Confusion Scale
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1