The Inhibitory-Spillover-Effect (ISE) on a deception task was investigated. The ISE occurs when performance in one self-control task facilitates performance in another (simultaneously conducted) self-control task. Deceiving requires increased access to inhibitory control. We hypothesized that inducing liars to control urination urgency (physical inhibition) would facilitate control during deceptive interviews (cognitive inhibition). Participants drank small (low-control) or large (high-control) amounts of water. Next, they lied or told the truth to an interviewer. Third-party observers assessed the presence of behavioral cues and made true/lie judgments. In the high-control, but not the low-control condition, liars displayed significantly fewer behavioral cues to deception, more behavioral cues signaling truth, and provided longer and more complex accounts than truth-tellers. Accuracy detecting liars in the high-control condition was significantly impaired; observers revealed bias toward perceiving liars as truth-tellers. The ISE can operate in complex behaviors. Acts of deception can be facilitated by covert manipulations of self-control.
Infants and children experience an intense form of intellectual engagement associated with learning a variety of new skills. A recent theory proposes that such broad learning experiences may be the key to maximal cognitive development not just during infancy and childhood but also during adulthood. To begin investigating this possibility, the present questionnaire on broad learning in adulthood builds on prior research on need for cognition, intellectual engagement, personal growth, and leisure activities. After several rounds with preliminary versions of the questionnaire, the final version consists of 28 items. Responses were gathered from two mTurk samples to measure scale reliability and to assess model fit. In the end, we obtained a satisfactory measure of broad learning that consists of six separate reliable scales. Once this questionnaire is validated in future studies, perhaps it could be used as a predictor for cognitive development during adulthood and for interventions inducing broad learning.
The purpose of this research was to examine how ethnicity, immigration status, and socioeconomic status (SES) may contribute to juror bias. A total of 320 Euro-American venire persons were assigned to 1 of 8 criminal court trial transcript conditions that varied defendant ethnicity (Mexican or Canadian), immigrant status (undocumented or documented), and SES (low or high). Dependent measures were verdict, sentencing, culpability, and trait attributions. Results indicated that the low-SES undocumented Mexican defendant was found guilty more often, given a more severe sentence, thought to be more culpable, and rated lower on a number of trait measures compared with all other conditions. Subtle bias theories, such as aversive racism, appear to best explain the biases in juror decisions.
KEYTERMS Immigration status, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, juror decisionsIn 2010, the number of immigrants in the United States reached an alltime high (Camarota, 2012), and with this rise in the number of immigrants also came a rise in prejudice toward immigrants (Falomir-Pichastor
The current study addressed whether defendant sexual orientation, defendant attractiveness, and juror gender influences juror decisions. Two competing theories were assessed as the primary mechanism for any potential negative bias sexual minorities may experience in the legal system: heterosexism and aversive heterosexism. Heterosexism is a form of bias toward gays/lesbians that appears more blatant in displays of discrimination, whereas aversive heterosexism appears as more of an implicit form of bias, only appearing when sexual orientation is paired with another perceived negative characteristic. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a trial transcript of either a heterosexual or gay/lesbian and attractive/unattractive defendant. Participants were asked to render a verdict, recommend a sentence, and provide guilt and culpability ratings. The theory of aversive heterosexism gained partial support from the results. When the defendant was gay/lesbian and coupled with other another negative attribute (unattractive) male jurors demonstrated bias.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.