Bradley J. Adame

Effects of Veracity, Modality, and Sanctioning on Credibility Assessment During Mediated and Unmediated Interviews

An experiment examined how veracity, modality, and experimenter sanctioning of deception influenced credibility assessments made by professionals who conducted interviews face-to-face (FtF) or by video conference (VC). Participants (N = 243) completed a trivia game with a confederate who encouraged cheating. Some lies were sanctioned by the experimenter and others were unsanctioned. The professional interviewers educed a high number of confessions in the sanctioned (58%) and unsanctioned (79%) lie conditions. Overall accuracy of the interviewers ranged from 45% to 67%. Interviewers were more accurate when judging veracity FtF than in VC. Those in the deceptive VC conditions (especially sanctioned liars) were rated by interviewers as more dominant, involved, relaxed, and active than those in the FtF condition, revealing that modality affected deceivers’ demeanor.

Implicit and explicit training in the mitigation of cognitive bias through the use of a serious game

We examine the mitigation of two cognitive biases through a video game.We conducted an experiment (N=708) to compare the game to an instructional video.The game was compared to outcomes testing knowledge and mitigation of the biases.Explicit instruction improved familiarity and knowledge of the biases more than implicit.More exposure through repeated play enhanced learning. Heuristics can interfere with information processing and hinder decision-making when more systematic processes that might lead to better decisions are ignored. Based on the heuristic-systematic model (HSM) of information processing, a serious training game (called MACBETH) was designed to address and mitigate cognitive biases that interfere with the analysis of evidence and the generation of hypotheses. Two biases are the focus of this paper-fundamental attribution error and confirmation bias. The efficacy of the serious game on knowledge and mitigation of biases was examined using an experiment in which participants (N=703) either played the MACBETH game or watched an instructional video about the biases. Results demonstrate the game to be more effective than the video at mitigating cognitive biases when explicit training methods are combined with repetitive play. Moreover, explicit instruction within the game provided greater familiarity and knowledge of the biases relative to implicit instruction. Suggestions for game development for purposes of enhancing cognitive processing and bias mitigation based on the MACBETH game design are discussed.

Empowered by Persuasive Deception: The Effects of Power and Deception on Dominance, Credibility, and Decision Making

This paper examines how power differences and deception jointly influence interactional dominance, credibility, and the outcomes of decision-making. Two theories, interpersonal deception theory and dyadic power theory, were merged to produce hypotheses about the effects of power and deception. A 3 (power: unequal-high, unequal-low, equal) × 3 (deception: truth-truth, truthful with deceptive partner, deceptive with truthful partner) experiment (N = 120) was conducted in which participants were asked to make a series of mock hiring decisions. Actor-partner analyses revealed that participants in the deception condition reported a significant increase in perceptions of their own power whereas their truthful partners reported a significant decrease in perceptions of their own power. Further, interactional dominance fostered credibility and goal attainment (i.e., making the best hiring decision in the truthful condition and hiring a friend in the deceptive condition) for both truth-tellers and deceivers.

Are users threatened by credibility assessment systems

Despite the improving accuracy of agent-based expert systems, human expert users aided by these systems have not improved their accuracy. Self-affirmation theory suggests that human expert users could be experiencing threat, causing them to act defensively and ignore the systems conflicting recommendations. Previous research has demonstrated that affirming an individual in an unrelated area reduces defensiveness and increases objectivity to conflicting information. Using an affirmation manipulation prior to a credibility assessment task, this study investigated if experts are threatened by counterattitudinal expert system recommendations. For our study, 178 credibility assessment experts from the American Polygraph Association (n = 134) and the European Unions border security agency Frontex (n = 44) interacted with a deception detection expert system to make a deception judgment that was immediately contradicted. Reducing the threat prior to making their judgments did not improve accuracy, but did improve objectivity toward the system. This study demonstrates that human experts are threatened by advanced expert systems that contradict their expertise. As more and more systems increase integration of artificial intelligence and inadvertently assail the expertise and abilities of users, threat and self-evaluative concerns will become an impediment to technology acceptance.

MACBETH: Development of a Training Game for the Mitigation of Cognitive Bias

This paper describes the process of rapid iterative prototyping used by a research team developing a training video game for the Sirius program funded by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA). Described are three stages of development, including a paper prototype, and builds for alpha and beta testing. Game development is documented, and the process of playtesting is reviewed with a focus on the challenges and lessons-learned. Advances made in the development of the game through the playtesting process are discussed along with implications of the rapid iterative prototyping approach.

Deceptive Language by Innocent and Guilty Criminal Suspects: The Influence of Dominance, Question, and Guilt on Interview Responses

This study proposed that criminal guilt interacts with dominance and interview question to affect linguistic properties during criminal interviews. A field experiment tested effects of criminal guilt, dominance, and question on linguistic properties of suspects’ responses using a 2 (criminal guilt: guilty/innocent) × 4 (question: Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4) mixed-model design with dominance as a covariate and question as a repeated factor. Analysis of linguistic properties from 37 criminal interviews indicated a hypothesized two-way interaction among dominance and guilt on immediacy and a three-way interaction among dominance, question, and guilt on complexity explored as part of the research question. Several other direct effects for dominance and question were noted. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.

Vested Interest, Disaster Preparedness, and Strategic Campaign Message Design

In recent years, the United States has recognized an increasing need for individual-level disaster preparedness, with federal, state, and local government agencies finding only limited success in instituting campaign-based disaster preparedness programs. Extant research indicates Americans generally remain poorly informed and badly unprepared for imminent disasters. Vested interest theory (Crano, 1997) is presented as a framework for designing and testing the effectiveness of television-based disaster preparedness campaign messages. High- and low-vested versions of an extant control message are compared to assess message efficacy as indicated by behavioral intentions, message acceptance, and preparedness related attitudes. Results indicate television-based video public service announcements manipulated with subtle message variations can be effective at influencing critical preparedness-related attitudes. The high-vested condition performed significantly better than the low-vested and control conditions for both behavioral intentions and perceptions of self-efficacy, two vitally important outcome variables associated with disaster preparedness.

Training Anchoring and Representativeness Bias Mitigation Through a Digital Game

Objective. Humans systematically make poor decisions because of cognitive biases. Can digital games train people to avoid cognitive biases? The goal of this study is to investigate the affordance of different educational media in training people about cognitive biases and to mitigate cognitive biases within their decision-making processes. Method. A between-subject experiment was conducted to compare a digital game, a traditional slideshow, and a combined condition in mitigating two types of cognitive biases: anchoring bias and representativeness bias. We measured both immediate effects and delayed effects after four weeks. Results. The digital game and slideshow conditions were effective in mitigating cognitive biases immediately after the training, but the effects decayed after four weeks. By providing the basic knowledge through the slideshow, then allowing learners to practice bias-mitigation techniques in the digital game, the combined condition was most effective at mitigating the cognitive biases both immediately and after four weeks.

Vested interest: developing scales for assessing flooding preparedness

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report research testing scales developed from a combination of vested interest (VI) theory and the extended parallel process model of fear appeals. The scales were created to measure variables specified by an expanded model of VI: certainty, salience, immediacy, self-efficacy, response-efficacy, and susceptibility. Design/methodology/approach – A survey was designed with subscales for each element and combined with additional disaster and risk perception variables. Survey data were collected from two populations in the US state of Oklahoma. Results from scale development and regression analyses are reported. Findings – Results show that the scales are robust and flexible to contextual modification. The scales return good to excellent reliabilities, providing evidence that the variables articulated by VI theory predict perceived salience and perceived preparedness. Practical implications – This study adds to the research pointing to the efficacy of VI theory in pro...

Mitigating Cognitive Bias through the Use of Serious Games: Effects of Feedback

A serious video game was created to teach players about cognitive bias and encourage mitigation of both confirmation bias and the fundamental attribution error. Multiplayer and single-player versions of the game were created to test the effect of different feedback sources on bias mitigation performance. A total of 626 participants were randomly assigned to play the single player/multiplayer game once or repeatedly. The results indicate the single player game was superior at reducing confirmation bias and that repeated plays and plays of longer duration were more effective at mitigating both biases than a control condition where participants watched a training video.