Shannon N. Nunn

New Mexico State University

Author Statistics

Papers

Citation

H-Index

i-10 index

Research Trends

Author Order

Document Type

Co-Authors

Elizabeth Arias

National Center for Health Statistics

Laura A. Thompson

New Mexico State University

Daniel M. Malloy

New Mexico State University

Gary D. Bond

Eastern New Mexico University

Cooperative Institutions

New Mexico State University

Lasen (United States)

National Center for Health Statistics

University of Cartagena

Lehman College

City University of New York

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Vital Research

Universidad Nacional Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo

National Vital Statistics System

Author Statistics

Papers

Citation

H-Index

i-10 index

Research Field

Post‐probe decision making in a prison context

Communication Monographs (2004)

Gary D. Bond Daniel M. Malloy Laura A. Thompson Elizabeth Arias Shannon N. Nunn

If a listener becomes suspicious during a conversation, and asks questions (probes) of a speaker, the listener tends to judge the speaker's message as honest. This result has been termed the probing effect (McCornack, Levine, Aleman, Oetzel, & Miller, ). This study hypothesized that an untested decision‐making phenomenon, an opposite probing effect, or a post‐probe tendency to judge a message as deceptive, might occur when lie‐biased individuals judge statement veracity. Prison inmates and non‐inmates participated in dyads as judges and speakers. Speakers watched a video, and then lied or told the truth to judges. Judges covertly showed thumbs up or down before asking questions, and subsequently made post‐probe judgments. Findings indicate that inmates use heuristic processing to a greater extent than non‐inmates, and that inmates, surprisingly, exhibit a probing effect, and not an opposite probing effect, when heuristic processing is employed to decide message veracity.

Statement (logic)

Miller

10.1080/0363452042000288328

Cite

Citations (8)

Lie‐biased Decision Making in Prison

Communication Reports (2005)

Gary D. Bond Daniel M. Malloy Elizabeth Arias Shannon N. Nunn Laura A. Thompson

Levine and McCornack (1992 Levine, T. R. and McCornack, S. A. 1992. Linking love and lies: A formal test of the McCornack and Parks model of deception detection. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 9(1): 143–154. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) found that persons who have a truth‐bias (those who tend to believe that most messages are truthful) exhibit low detection accuracy, that moderately suspicious people are more accurate at detecting, and suggested that lie‐bias persons would be as inaccurate at detecting lies as those who are truth‐biased. This study tested Levine and McCornack's suggestion that lie‐biased people would be inaccurate deception detectors by conducting field experiments in Kansas and New Mexico prisons. Results indicate that prisoners are lie‐biased and are accurate detectors of lies but not truths, and findings suggest a reversed veracity effect in prison.

Lie detection

10.1080/08934210500084180

Cite

Citations (31)