CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 247Deception detection and forensic psychologyPsychology of Social InfluencePersonality Traits and Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Self-Presentation and Verbal Deception: Do Self-Presenters Lie More?

Feldman, Robert S., Forrest, James A., Happ, Benjamin R.·2002·Basic and Applied Social Psychology
DOI 10.1207/153248302753674848
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examined the effects of self-presentation goals on the amount and type of verbal deception used by participants in same-gender and mixed-gender dyads. Participants were asked to engage in a conversation that was secretly videotaped. Self-presentational goal was manipulated, where one member of the dyad (the self-presenter) was told to either appear (a) likable, (b) competent, or (c) was told to simply get to know his or her partner (control condition). After the conversation, self-presenters were asked to review a video recording of the interaction and identify the instances in which they had deceived the other person. Overall, participants told more lies when they had a goal to appear likable or competent compared to participants in the control condition, and the content of the lies varied according to self-presentation goal. In addition, lies told by men and women differed in content, although not in quantity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15324834basp2402_8

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Deception in communicative encounters resorts to manipulation of appearance, likeability, and competence.

    “Such a result is similar to a previous finding that argued that deception in communicative encounters resorts to manipulation of appearance, likeability, and competence (Feldman, Forrest, & Happ, 2002).”

    From Mobile Sexuality: Presentations of Young Filipinos in Dating Apps (2020) · cites this paper as Feldman, Forrest, & Happ, 2002

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 15 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. 10.1037//0022-3514.74.1.63 · DOI
  2. Erwin, P. (1993). Friendship and peer relations in children. Chichester, England: Wiley.
  3. 10.1037//0022-3514.50.1.106 · DOI
  4. Jones, E. E. & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231-262). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  5. 10.1207/15324839751036940 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Simon, J. L. (1985). Basic research methods in social science (3rd ed.). New York: Random House.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Feldman, R. S., Forrest, J. A., & Happ, B. R.
Venue
Basic and Applied Social Psychology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2002-06
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
163-170
ISSN
  • 0197-3533 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-4834
DOI
10.1207/153248302753674848
OpenAlex
W4248565256
Cited by
247
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
7.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Basic and Applied Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
self-presentation, verbal deception, lying, likeability, competence, gender differences, interpersonal conversation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review