谎言-真相判断:适应性测谎器理论与真相-默认理论的比较与对照

IF 4.7 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Communication Theory Pub Date : 2024-05-31 DOI:10.1093/ct/qtae008
Timothy R Levine, Chris N H Street
{"title":"谎言-真相判断:适应性测谎器理论与真相-默认理论的比较与对照","authors":"Timothy R Levine, Chris N H Street","doi":"10.1093/ct/qtae008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two contemporary theoretical perspectives explain when and how people make lie–truth judgments. The adaptive lie detector account (ALIED) and truth-default theory (TDT) are described, compared, and contrasted. ALIED and TDT come from different scholarly traditions and propose very different processes and mechanisms, yet they converge on many behavioral predictions. Both views presume adaptive processes. ALIED presumes that humans are adaptive by using available information while TDT presumes that the adaptive value of efficient communication outweighs the value of real-time deception detection. ALIED proposes a Bayesian reasoning approach to lie–truth judgments that weighs information based on its perceived diagnosticity, making no distinction in the processes between reaching a lie and truth judgment. TDT alternatively proposes that the passive presumption of the truth is the default, and the presence of triggers is required to reach a lie judgment. Suggestions for future research are provided.","PeriodicalId":48102,"journal":{"name":"Communication Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lie–truth judgments: adaptive lie detector account and truth-default theory compared and contrasted\",\"authors\":\"Timothy R Levine, Chris N H Street\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ct/qtae008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two contemporary theoretical perspectives explain when and how people make lie–truth judgments. The adaptive lie detector account (ALIED) and truth-default theory (TDT) are described, compared, and contrasted. ALIED and TDT come from different scholarly traditions and propose very different processes and mechanisms, yet they converge on many behavioral predictions. Both views presume adaptive processes. ALIED presumes that humans are adaptive by using available information while TDT presumes that the adaptive value of efficient communication outweighs the value of real-time deception detection. ALIED proposes a Bayesian reasoning approach to lie–truth judgments that weighs information based on its perceived diagnosticity, making no distinction in the processes between reaching a lie and truth judgment. TDT alternatively proposes that the passive presumption of the truth is the default, and the presence of triggers is required to reach a lie judgment. Suggestions for future research are provided.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication Theory\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtae008\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtae008","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

两种当代理论观点解释了人们何时以及如何做出谎言-真相判断。本文对适应性测谎器理论(ALIED)和真相默认理论(TDT)进行了描述、比较和对比。ALIED和TDT来自不同的学术传统,提出的过程和机制也大相径庭,但它们在许多行为预测上却趋于一致。这两种观点都假定了适应过程。ALIED 认为人类通过利用可用信息来适应环境,而 TDT 则认为高效交流的适应价值大于实时欺骗检测的价值。ALIED 提出了一种贝叶斯推理方法来进行谎言-真相判断,该方法根据信息的可感知诊断性来权衡信息,在得出谎言和真相判断的过程中不做任何区分。而 TDT 则提出,被动推定真相是默认的,需要有触发因素才能做出谎言判断。本文对未来的研究提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Lie–truth judgments: adaptive lie detector account and truth-default theory compared and contrasted
Two contemporary theoretical perspectives explain when and how people make lie–truth judgments. The adaptive lie detector account (ALIED) and truth-default theory (TDT) are described, compared, and contrasted. ALIED and TDT come from different scholarly traditions and propose very different processes and mechanisms, yet they converge on many behavioral predictions. Both views presume adaptive processes. ALIED presumes that humans are adaptive by using available information while TDT presumes that the adaptive value of efficient communication outweighs the value of real-time deception detection. ALIED proposes a Bayesian reasoning approach to lie–truth judgments that weighs information based on its perceived diagnosticity, making no distinction in the processes between reaching a lie and truth judgment. TDT alternatively proposes that the passive presumption of the truth is the default, and the presence of triggers is required to reach a lie judgment. Suggestions for future research are provided.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Communication Theory
Communication Theory COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
2.70%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Communication Theory is an international forum publishing high quality, original research into the theoretical development of communication from across a wide array of disciplines, such as communication studies, sociology, psychology, political science, cultural and gender studies, philosophy, linguistics, and literature. A journal of the International Communication Association, Communication Theory especially welcomes work in the following areas of research, all of them components of ICA: Communication and Technology, Communication Law and Policy, Ethnicity and Race in Communication, Feminist Scholarship, Global Communication and Social Change, Health Communication, Information Systems, Instructional/Developmental Communication, Intercultural Communication, Interpersonal Communication, Journalism Studies, Language and Social Interaction, Mass Communication, Organizational Communication, Philosophy of Communication, Political Communication, Popular Communication, Public Relations, Visual Communication Studies, Children, Adolescents and the Media, Communication History, Game Studies, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies, and Intergroup Communication. The journal aims to be inclusive in theoretical approaches insofar as these pertain to communication theory.
期刊最新文献
Situational privacy: theorizing privacy as communication and media practice Lie–truth judgments: adaptive lie detector account and truth-default theory compared and contrasted Mainstreaming as a meta-process: A systematic review and conceptual model of factors contributing to the mainstreaming of radical and extremist positions Why, how, when, and for whom does digital disconnection work? A process-based framework of digital disconnection Conceptualizing embeddedness as a key dimension for analyzing journalistic cultures
×
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:481959085
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