When telling a lie, humans might engage in stronger monitoring of their behavior than when telling the truth. Initial evidence has indeed pointed towards a stronger recruitment of capacity-limited monitoring processes in dishonest than honest responding, conceivably resulting from the necessity to overcome automatic tendencies to respond honestly. Previous results suggested monitoring to be confined to response execution, however, whereas the current study goes beyond these findings by specifically probing for post-execution monitoring. Participants responded (dis)honestly to simple yes/no questions in a first task and switched to an unrelated second task after a response–stimulus interval of 0 ms or 1000 ms. Dishonest responses did not only prolong response times in Task 1, but also in Task 2 with a short response–stimulus interval. These findings support the assumption that increased monitoring for dishonest responses extends beyond mere response execution, a mechanism that is possibly tuned to assess the successful completion of a dishonest act.

说谎时，人类可能会比说真话时更严格地监控自己的行为。初步证据确实表明，在不诚实的情况下，能力有限的监测过程比诚实的反应更有力，这可以想象是由于必须克服诚实反应的自动倾向。然而，之前的结果表明监控仅限于响应执行，而当前的研究通过专门探索执行后监控超越了这些发现。参与者在第一个任务中诚实地回答（不）简单的是/否问题，并在 0 毫秒或 1000 毫秒的响应-刺激间隔后切换到不相关的第二个任务。不诚实的反应不仅延长了任务 1 中的反应时间，而且在任务 2 中也延长了反应-刺激间隔。