Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Who should I look at?
View graph of relations

Who should I look at?: eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Who should I look at? eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit. / Jundi, Shyma; Vrij, Aldert; Mann, Samantha et al.
In: Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 19, No. 8, 2013, p. 661-671.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Jundi, S, Vrij, A, Mann, S, Hope, L, Hillmann, J, Warmelink, L & Gahr, E 2013, 'Who should I look at? eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit', Psychology, Crime and Law, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 661-671. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332

APA

Jundi, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S., Hope, L., Hillmann, J., Warmelink, L., & Gahr, E. (2013). Who should I look at? eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit. Psychology, Crime and Law, 19(8), 661-671. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332

Vancouver

Jundi S, Vrij A, Mann S, Hope L, Hillmann J, Warmelink L et al. Who should I look at? eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit. Psychology, Crime and Law. 2013;19(8):661-671. Epub 2013 May 13. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332

Author

Jundi, Shyma ; Vrij, Aldert ; Mann, Samantha et al. / Who should I look at? eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit. In: Psychology, Crime and Law. 2013 ; Vol. 19, No. 8. pp. 661-671.

Bibtex

@article{480e590e574941988c4d900b5ee4796c,
title = "Who should I look at?: eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit",
abstract = "Pairs of liars and pairs of truth tellers were interviewed and the amount of eyecontact they made with the interviewer and each other was coded. Given that liarstake their credibility less for granted than truth tellers, we expected liars tomonitor the interviewer to see whether they were being believed, and to try harderto convince the interviewer that they were telling the truth. It was hypothesisedthat this monitoring would manifest itself through more eye contact with theinterviewer and less eye contact with each other than in the case of truth tellers. Atotal of 43 pairs of participants took part in the experiment. Truth tellers hadlunch in a nearby restaurant. Liars took some money from a purse, and wereasked to pretend that instead of taking the money, they had been to a nearbyrestaurant together for lunch. Pairs of liars looked less at each other anddisplayed more eye contact with the interviewer than pairs of truth tellers. Theimplications of these findings are discussed.",
keywords = "interviewing, behaviour, deception detection, deception, groups",
author = "Shyma Jundi and Aldert Vrij and Samantha Mann and Lorraine Hope and Jackie Hillmann and Lara Warmelink and Esther Gahr",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "661--671",
journal = "Psychology, Crime and Law",
issn = "1068-316X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who should I look at?

T2 - eye contact during collective interviewing as a cue to deceit

AU - Jundi, Shyma

AU - Vrij, Aldert

AU - Mann, Samantha

AU - Hope, Lorraine

AU - Hillmann, Jackie

AU - Warmelink, Lara

AU - Gahr, Esther

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Pairs of liars and pairs of truth tellers were interviewed and the amount of eyecontact they made with the interviewer and each other was coded. Given that liarstake their credibility less for granted than truth tellers, we expected liars tomonitor the interviewer to see whether they were being believed, and to try harderto convince the interviewer that they were telling the truth. It was hypothesisedthat this monitoring would manifest itself through more eye contact with theinterviewer and less eye contact with each other than in the case of truth tellers. Atotal of 43 pairs of participants took part in the experiment. Truth tellers hadlunch in a nearby restaurant. Liars took some money from a purse, and wereasked to pretend that instead of taking the money, they had been to a nearbyrestaurant together for lunch. Pairs of liars looked less at each other anddisplayed more eye contact with the interviewer than pairs of truth tellers. Theimplications of these findings are discussed.

AB - Pairs of liars and pairs of truth tellers were interviewed and the amount of eyecontact they made with the interviewer and each other was coded. Given that liarstake their credibility less for granted than truth tellers, we expected liars tomonitor the interviewer to see whether they were being believed, and to try harderto convince the interviewer that they were telling the truth. It was hypothesisedthat this monitoring would manifest itself through more eye contact with theinterviewer and less eye contact with each other than in the case of truth tellers. Atotal of 43 pairs of participants took part in the experiment. Truth tellers hadlunch in a nearby restaurant. Liars took some money from a purse, and wereasked to pretend that instead of taking the money, they had been to a nearbyrestaurant together for lunch. Pairs of liars looked less at each other anddisplayed more eye contact with the interviewer than pairs of truth tellers. Theimplications of these findings are discussed.

KW - interviewing

KW - behaviour

KW - deception detection

KW - deception

KW - groups

U2 - 10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332

DO - 10.1080/1068316X.2013.793332

M3 - Journal article

VL - 19

SP - 661

EP - 671

JO - Psychology, Crime and Law

JF - Psychology, Crime and Law

SN - 1068-316X

IS - 8

ER -