ABSTRACT

The Asymmetric Information Management (AIM) technique encourages truth tellers to adopt a forthcoming verbal strategy and liars a withholding strategy. We investigated the effectiveness of this technique using a follow-up statement. We predicted that truth tellers in the AIM condition would provide more new and overall detail, with a higher proportion of complications, compared to control truth tellers, whereas AIM liars would use more self-handicapping strategies and common knowledge details, with fewer commissions, repetitions, and less overall detail than control liars. This was tested using a mixed-factors design in which truth tellers (n = 65) gave an honest recollection of a recent trip while liars fabricated a story (n = 62). Participants provided an initial statement and half received the AIM instructions prior to providing their second statement. Truth tellers in the AIM condition provided more new detail and complications in their second statement compared to truth telling controls. Unlike previous research, AIM instructions had no significant effect on liars’ statements. No other differences emerged. In conclusion, the AIM instructions elicit some new information from truth tellers but do not improve classification from liars.

摘要

不对称信息管理（AIM）技术鼓励说真话的人采取即将到来的口头策略，而说谎者则采取隐瞒策略。我们使用后续声明研究了该技术的有效性。我们预测，与控制说真话的人相比，AIM 条件下的说真话的人会提供更多新的、全面的细节，并发症的比例更高，而 AIM 说谎者会使用更多的自我设限策略和常识细节，佣金和重复更少。 ，并且整体细节比控制骗子少。这是使用混合因素设计进行测试的，其中说真话的人 ( n  = 65) 诚实地回忆了最近的一次旅行，而说谎者编造了一个故事 ( n  = 65)= 62）。参与者提供了初步陈述，一半在提供第二份陈述之前收到了 AIM 说明。与说真话的对照组相比，AIM 条件下说真话的人在第二次陈述中提供了更多新的细节和复杂性。与之前的研究不同，AIM 指令对说谎者的陈述没有显着影响。没有出现其他差异。总之，AIM 指令从说真话的人那里引出了一些新信息，但没有改进对说谎者的分类。