바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1229-0653

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.30 No.1

Citation Share

거짓말 탐지 상황에서 객관적 자기인식이 용의자의 심리상태에 미치는 영향

The effects of objective self-awareness on lying suspects’ psychological characteristics

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2016, v.30 no.1, pp.115-130
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.1.007
박희정 (대구지방경찰청)
홍우한 (대구지방경찰청)
박희정, & 홍우한. (2016). 거짓말 탐지 상황에서 객관적 자기인식이 용의자의 심리상태에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 30(1), 115-130, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.1.007

초록

본 연구의 목적은 거짓말 탐지 상황에서 객관적 자기인식이 용의자들의 심리상태에 미치는 영향에 대해서 확인하기 위함이다. 이를 위해서 실제 범죄사건의 용의자를 대상으로 객관적 자기인식을 조작(거울유무)하여 죄책감/수치심, 상태불안, 사회적 바람직성을 측정하였으며, 용의자 집단 중 폴리그래프 검사 결과를 근거로 진실집단과 거짓집단으로 나누어 객관적 자기인식에 따른 집단 간 심리상태를 비교하였다. 분석결과, 죄책감은 거짓집단이 진실집단보다 더 높게 나타났으나, 수치심은 집단 간 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 그에 반해 상태불안과 사회적 바람직성에서는 객관적 자기인식에 따라 진실집단과 거짓집단 간 차이가 나타났다. 구체적으로 진실집단은 객관적 자기인식에 따라 상태불안과 사회적 바람직성에서 차이가 나타나지 않았으나, 거짓집단은 거울이 있는 조건이 거울이 없는 조건에 비해 상태불안과 사회적 바람직성이 유의미하게 높은 것으로 나타났다. 즉 객관적 자기인식이 높을 경우 거짓말 하는 사람은 불안을 더 느끼며 상대방에게 보다 좋은 인상을 주기 위해 긍정적 인상관리 전략을 활용한다는 것을 확인하였다. 이러한 연구결과는 향후 정확한 거짓말 탐지를 필요로 하는 경찰, 검찰 등 수사기관에 유용한 정보를 제공할 것으로 판단된다.

keywords
거짓말, 객관적 자기인식, 죄책감, 불안, 인상관리, deception, objective self-awareness, guilty, anxiety, impression management

Abstract

This study aims to examine the effects of objective self-awareness on the psychological characteristics of suspects when they tell a lie. To manipulate objective self-awareness, half the suspects were seated in front of a mirror and half were not during a polygraph test. After the polygraph test, the suspects were instructed to complete a psychological characteristics questionnaire focusing on such characteristics as shame/guilt, state anxiety, and impression management. Additionally, we divided the suspects into two groups depending on their polygraph test results to identify the differences in psychological characteristics between the lie and truth groups. The lie group showed significantly higher guilt than did the truth group; however, the two groups were not statistically significantly different in terms of their reporting of shame. In addition, there were differences in anxiety and impression management, depending on objective self-awareness. The lie group who completed the polygraph in front of a mirror were higher in anxiety and expressed more impression management than did those who were not in front of a mirror. In contrast, the truth group was unaffected by the presence of the mirror. These results showed there were differences in the psychological characteristics of the suspects in the two groups depending on objective self-awareness. These findings may help to correctly detect truth and lies in many applied settings, such as the forensic, judicial, and investigative domains.

keywords
거짓말, 객관적 자기인식, 죄책감, 불안, 인상관리, deception, objective self-awareness, guilty, anxiety, impression management

참고문헌

1.

김고은, 이상현, 김재홍, 최훈, 방철, 이장한 (2013). 거짓말 탐지상황에서 나타나는 용의자의 심리특성 연구. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 27(3), 75-86.

2.

김석찬, 장은희, 이상현, 방철, 김시온, 김현택 (2015). 폴리그래프 검사 요인에 따른 검찰 처분 및 판결 일치도 연구: 검찰청 폴리그래프 실증 연구. 한국심리학회지: 법정 6(1), 13-31.

3.

김정택 (1978). 특성불안과 사회성과의 관계. 고려대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

4.

박판규 (2003). 거짓말탐지검사. 서울: 삼우사.

5.

송수민 (2008). 수치심경향성과 죄책감경향성의 심리적 특성 비교. 한국심리학회지: 상담 및 심리치료 20(1), 125-144.

6.

심종온 (1999). 수치심 경향성, 죄책감 경향성 및 사건귀인이 우울증상에 미치는 영향. 가톨릭대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

7.

정보라 (2005). 사회적 바람직성의 구인 탐색. 이화여자대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

8.

Adler, A. (1930). Individual psychology, Oxford, England: Clark University Press.

9.

Aquino, K., & Reed, A. II(2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423-1440.

10.

Argyle, M. (1969). Social Interaction. New York: Artherton.

11.

Beaman, A. L., Klentz, B., Diener, E., & Svanum, S. (1979). Objective self-awareness and transgression in children: A field study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1835–1846.

12.

Ben-Shakhar, G. (1991). Clinical judgment and decision-making in CQT-polygraphy. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science. 26. 232-240.

13.

Buckley, J. P., & Senses, L. C. (1991). The Influence of Race and Gender on Blind Polygraph Charts Analyses, Polygraph, 20(4), 247-258.

14.

Bull, R. (1988). What is the lie-detection test. The polygraph test: Lies, truth and science, 10-19.

15.

Buller, D. B., Burgoon, J. K., Ebseu, A. S., & White, C. H. (1994). Interpersonal deception: VII. Behavioral profilers of falsification, equivocation, and concealment. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13, 366-395.

16.

Carver, C. S.(1974). Facilitation of physical aggression on through objective self-awareness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 365-370.

17.

DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to Deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74-118.

18.

DePaulo, B. M., & Kashy, D. A. (1998). Everyday Lies in Close and Casual Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 63–79.

19.

Diener, E., & Wallbom, M. (1976). Effects of self-awareness on antinormative behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 107-111.

20.

Duval, S., Duval, V., & Neely, R. (1979). Self-focus, felt responsibility and helping behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1769-1778.

21.

Duval, S., & Wichlund, R. A. (1972). A theory of objective self-awareness. New York: Academic Press.

22.

Eisenberg, N. (1986). Altruistic cognition, emotion, and Behavior. Hilsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

23.

Ekman, P. (2001). Telling lies: clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics and marriage. New York: Norton and Company.

24.

Ekman, P., O’Sullivan, M., Friesen, W. V., & Scherer, K. (1991). Face, voice, and body in detecting deceit. Journal of nonverbal behavior, 15 , 125-135.

25.

Gougler, M., Nelson, R., Handler, M., Krapohl, D., Shaw, P., & Bierman, L. (2011). Meta-analytic survey of criterion accuracy of validated polygraph techniques. Polygraph, 40, 194-305.

26.

Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2002). Repeated Interrogations: Verbal and non-verbal cues to deception. Applied cognitive psychology, 16, 243-257.

27.

Harder, D. W., & Lewis, S. J. (1987). The assessment of shame and guilt. In J. N. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

28.

Harder, D. H., & Zalma, A. (1990). Two promising shame and guilt scales: A construct validity comparison. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 729-745.

29.

Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Doering, N. (2010). Impression and information management: On the strategic self-regulation of innocent and guilty suspects. Open Criminology Journal, 3, 10-16.

30.

Horvath, F. S., & Reid, J. E. (1971). The reliability of polygraph examiner diagnosis of truth and deception. The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 62, 276-281.

31.

Ickes, W., Wicklund, R., & Ferris, C. (1973). Objective self-awareness and self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 202-219.

32.

Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., Buckley, J. P., & Jayne, B. P. (2001). Criminal interrogations and confessions. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.

33.

Kircher, J. C., & Raskin, D. C. (1988). Human versus computerized evaluations of polygraph data in laboratory setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 291-302.

34.

Lawson, G., Stedom, A., Zhang, C., Eubanks, D., & Frumkin, L. (2013). The effects of self-awareness on body movement indicators of the intention to deceive. Applied Ergonomics, 44, 687-693.

35.

Lewis, M. (1992). Shame: the exposed self. New York: The Free Press.

36.

Matte, J. A., & Reuss, R. M. (1991). A study of the relative effectiveness of physiological data in field polygraph examinations. Polygraph, 21(1), 1-22.

37.

Mueller-Hanson, R. A., Heggestad, E. D., & Thornton, G. C. III. (2006). Individual differences in impression management: An exploration of the psychological process underlying faking. Psychology Science, 48, 288-312.

38.

Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Manual for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding(BIDR-7). Toronto/Buffalo: Multi-Health systems.

39.

Phillips, A. G., & Silvia, P. J. (2005). Self-Awareness and the Emotional Consequences of Self-Discrepancies. Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 703-713.

40.

Rogers, C. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality and interpersonal relationships as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch(Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science, vol. 3: Formulations of the person and the social context. New York: McGraw Hill.

41.

Spielberger, C. D. (1977). Theory and measurement of anxiety states. In R. B. Cattell & R. M. Dreger (Eds.), Handbook of modern personality theory. New York: Wiley.

42.

Vrij, A., Edward, K., Roberts, K. P., & Bull, R. (2000). Detecting deceit via analysis of verbal and nonverbal behavior. Journal of nonverbal behavior, 24 , 239-263.

43.

Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., Rosenthal , R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.14. New York: Academic Press. pp.1-59.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격

논문 투고 OA 정책