Recently in deception detection research it has been shown that veracity judgments infrequently occur without artificial prompting in paradigms representative of the area at large (Clare, 2013). It is apparent through casual observation however that people do judge veracity in natural contexts and the question is raised as to what does instigate those judgments. One possible cause of veracity judgment is outcome relevant involvement. An experiment was conducted testing this hypothesis, replicating Clare (2013), and testing the efficacy of explicit instructions to consider veracity on the occurrence of veracity judgment. Veracity judgment was measured in two ways. Results do not show support for the outcome-relevance hypothesis but do replicate Clare (2013) and give a quantitative assessment of how strongly instructions to consider veracity do in fact provoke veracity judgment.
Read
