Truthfulness as the basis for ethical safeguards in deceptive research: An interview study with researchers.

Ethical safeguards such as debriefing are often recommended or required for research studies in which participants are deceived. However, existing guidance on these safeguards seems insufficiently coherent and precise, which may be associated with their suboptimal implementation in practice. This study aimed to contribute to a more coherent and precise framework of ethical safeguards in deceptive studies through semi-structured interviews with a diverse sample of 24 researchers who had significant experience with deception. Interviewees discussed which ethical safeguards they implemented and how, as well as their relation to the notion of truthfulness (i.e., the intentional communication of true information). Moreover, interviewees provided a variety of reasons for and against implementing these safeguards, as well as how these reasons varied with the particular context of a study. Overall, the current study contributes to a more coherent and precise understanding of ethical safeguards in deceptive research that could be useful for guiding researchers and ethics reviewers in their ethical decision-making, although certain imprecisions and incoherent aspects remain in need of further investigation and normative reflection.

Finnish district judges' assessments of live versus video-mediated party statements in court.

The increase in remote hearings after the COVID-19 pandemic presents an urgent need to examine how judges assess video-mediated witness and party statements compared with live statements. There is currently a limited body of research on this subject. As for the assessment itself, professionals within the judicial system sometimes believe they can detect deception based on visible cues such as body language and emotional expression. Research has, however, shown that lies cannot be detected based on such cues. The Finnish Supreme Court has also given rulings in accordance with the scientific literature. In this study, we used a survey to investigate how much importance a Finnish sample of district judges (N = 47) gave to several variables pertaining to the statement or the statement giver, such as body language and emotional expression. We also investigated the association between the judges' beliefs about the relevance of body language and emotional expression and their preference for live statements or statements via videoconference. The judges reported giving more importance to body language and emotional expression than legal psychology research and Finnish Supreme Court rulings would call for. Our results also indicated that there was a slight bias to assess live statements more favorably than statements given via videoconference, as well as a slight bias in favor of the injured party. More effort must be put into making judges and Supreme Courts aware of findings in legal psychology to avoid biases based on intuitive reasoning where it is contrary to scientific evidence.

Truthfulness Predominates in Americans' Conceptualizations of Honesty: A Prototype Analysis.

Honesty is a near universally valued trait. However, the term honesty captures a litany of traits and behaviors, obscuring research on social perceptions and trait measurement of honesty and creating philosophical difficulties in accounting for what (if anything) unifies this diversity. We applied a prototype analysis approach to identify the most central elements of lay honesty conceptualizations, identifying elements that come to mind and are explicitly acknowledged as important to honesty. In five studies (N = 1,442), U.S. American participants generated 6,000+ free responses characterizing honesty and indicated which subtraits and behaviors best represent honesty. Truthfulness was most central to lay honesty conceptualizations across all studies and several centrality indices (frequency among responses and participants, agreement across participants, priority in lists, explicit ratings), though several other features were prominent. Findings illuminate social perceptions of honesty, critique popular measurement of trait honesty, and offer empirical foundations for philosophical analysis of honesty.

Are we willing to share what we believe is true? Factors influencing susceptibility to fake news.

Background: The contemporary media landscape is saturated with the ubiquitous presence of misinformation. One can point to several factors that amplify the spread and dissemination of false information, such as blurring the line between expert and layman's opinions, economic incentives promoting the publication of sensational information, the zero cost of sharing false information, and many more. In this study, we investigate some of the mechanisms of fake news dissemination that have eluded scientific scrutiny: the evaluation of veracity and behavioral engagement with information in light of its factual truthfulness (either true or false), cognitive utility (either enforcing or questioning participants' beliefs), and presentation style (either sober or populistic). Results: Two main results emerge from our experiment. We find that the evaluation of veracity is mostly related to the objective truthfulness of a news item. However, the probability of engagement is more related to the congruence of the information with the participants' preconceived beliefs than to objective truthfulness or information presentation style. Conclusion: We conclude a common notion that the spread of fake news can be limited by fact-checking and educating people might not be entirely true, as people will share fake information as long as it reduces the entropy of their mental models of the world. We also find support for the Trojan Horse hypothesis of fake news dissemination.

Explainable online health information truthfulness in Consumer Health Search.

Introduction: People are today increasingly relying on health information they find online to make decisions that may impact both their physical and mental wellbeing. Therefore, there is a growing need for systems that can assess the truthfulness of such health information. Most of the current literature solutions use machine learning or knowledge-based approaches treating the problem as a binary classification task, discriminating between correct information and misinformation. Such solutions present several problems with regard to user decision making, among which: (i) the binary classification task provides users with just two predetermined possibilities with respect to the truthfulness of the information, which users should take for granted; indeed, (ii) the processes by which the results were obtained are often opaque and the results themselves have little or no interpretation. Methods: To address these issues, we approach the problem as an ad hoc retrieval task rather than a classification task, with reference, in particular, to the Consumer Health Search task. To do this, a previously proposed Information Retrieval model, which considers information truthfulness as a dimension of relevance, is used to obtain a ranked list of both topically-relevant and truthful documents. The novelty of this work concerns the extension of such a model with a solution for the explainability of the results obtained, by relying on a knowledge base consisting of scientific evidence in the form of medical journal articles. Results and discussion: We evaluate the proposed solution both quantitatively, as a standard classification task, and qualitatively, through a user study to examine the "explained" ranked list of documents. The results obtained illustrate the solution's effectiveness and usefulness in making the retrieved results more interpretable by Consumer Health Searchers, both with respect to topical relevance and truthfulness.

How researchers can make verbal lie detection more attractive for practitioners.

Over the last 30 years deception researchers have changed their attention from observing nonverbal behaviour to analysing speech content. However, many practitioners we speak to are reluctant to make the change from nonverbal to verbal lie detection. In this article we present what practitioners believe is problematic about verbal lie detection: the interview style typically used is not suited for verbal lie detection; the most diagnostic verbal cue to deceit (total details) is not suited for lie detection purposes; practitioners are looking for signs of deception but verbal deception researchers are mainly examining cues that indicate truthfulness; cut-off points (decision rules to decide when someone is lying) do not exist; different verbal indicators are required for different types of lie; and verbal veracity indicators may be culturally defined. We discuss how researchers could address these problems.

The Problem of Clinical Deception and Why We Cannot Begin in the Middle.

In this brief commentary, I offer an appreciative yet critical analysis of Abram Brummett and Erica Salter's article, "Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Deception." I challenge the authors to clarify their choice of the term "deception" (as opposed to "lying" or "dishonesty"), and I explain how these different terms may affect one's moral analysis. I also draw attention to the authors' claim that veracity is the ethical default of clinicians. I argue that their failure to defend this claim renders their framework more limited in its usefulness than they seem to acknowledge. While their framework does an excellent job of identifying morally salient features of clinical deception, it cannot be used to measure the strength of justification for an act of deception apart from a normative conception of truthfulness.

Truthfulness and the person living with dementia: Embedded intentions, speech acts and conforming to the reality.

Highly reputable bodies have said that lying is to be avoided when speaking with people living with dementia, unless it cannot be. And yet, the evidence is that many professionals looking after people who live with dementia have been lying to them. I wish to consider an underlying philosophical justification for the moral position that allows lying under some circumstances whilst still condemning it generally. It can seem difficult to ignore the immorality of lying, but thinkers have developed arguments to get around the absolute prohibition. I shall argue that in concrete circumstances the object and the intended end of an action are not as clearly distinct as has been presumed. Further, looking at how language functions allows us to appeal to speech acts and to see the illocutionary force of a statement as way to broaden its purview. We need not think that the only options are between lying and not lying; there is also the possibility, in exigent circumstances, of 'conforming to the reality', which would allow a more nuanced account of moral acts, where the intentional nature of the act is no longer to lie. There are, thus, extreme concrete circumstances where not to speak the truth may be excusable, even if regrettable.

The effects of repetition frequency on the illusory truth effect.

Repeated information is often perceived as more truthful than new information. This finding is known as the illusory truth effect, and it is typically thought to occur because repetition increases processing fluency. Because fluency and truth are frequently correlated in the real world, people learn to use processing fluency as a marker for truthfulness. Although the illusory truth effect is a robust phenomenon, almost all studies examining it have used three or fewer repetitions. To address this limitation, we conducted two experiments using a larger number of repetitions. In Experiment 1, we showed participants trivia statements up to 9 times and in Experiment 2 statements were shown up to 27 times. Later, participants rated the truthfulness of the previously seen statements and of new statements. In both experiments, we found that perceived truthfulness increased as the number of repetitions increased. However, these truth rating increases were logarithmic in shape. The largest increase in perceived truth came from encountering a statement for the second time, and beyond this were incrementally smaller increases in perceived truth for each additional repetition. These findings add to our theoretical understanding of the illusory truth effect and have applications for advertising, politics, and the propagation of "fake news."

Emphasizing truthfulness in COVID-19 test declarations.

In previous correspondence, it was explained that faking COVID-19 diagnostic tests and vaccination certifications posits serious concerns for matters of ethics and economics. With this, we suggest, in this paper, the importance of giving emphasis to being truthful in declaring their COVID-19 diagnostic test results and vaccination certificates. Also, in being truthful, it is emphasized in this paper that honesty and transparency in regard to the said results and certificates are necessary in ensuring public health and promoting awareness during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Criticism in a foreign language hurts less.

Understanding emotional resonances to social evaluations delivered in different languages may contribute to favourable social communication in today's increasingly internationalised world. The present study thus investigated the language-induced emotionality differences by presenting Chinese-English bilinguals with self-referential praising and criticising statements in both their native Chinese and foreign English languages and asking them to make their affective and cognitive judgments on the comments, namely, to rate how pleased they were by the comments and how truly the comments described their attributes. Results revealed that while criticism was rated more unpleasant than praise in both languages, the unpleasantness was reduced by the use of English as compared to Chinese. Intriguingly, no cross-language differences were found in the cognitive assessment. Our findings may shed light on facilitating affective social communication using different languages.