Background: Deception can be associated with a heterogeneous network of concepts such as exaggeration, misleading, white lies, and faking. This paper assesses the tendency to deceive in aging. Objective: Our main aim was to assess whether older adults would demonstrate a low tendency to deceive. Methods: A total of 42 older adults (mean age 67.64 years, SD 7.87) and 45 younger adults (mean age 21.71 years, SD 2.66) were administered a deception scale including items such as “I sometimes tell lies if I have to” or “I never take things that don't belong to me.” Participants were also administered an inhibition task. Results: The results demonstrated a low tendency to deceive and low inhibition in older adults compared with younger ones. The low tendency to deceive in the older adults was significantly correlated with their diminished inhibitory ability. Discussion: The low tendency to deceive in aging seems to be related to a difficulty in inhibiting an honest response. Since inhibitory compromise has been considered mainly to trigger negative consequences for cognition, the present paper illustrates how this age-related compromise can be associated with positive social outcomes, i.e., a low tendency to deceive.

Keywords:
Aging, Deception, Inhibition
1.
El Haj M, Saloppé X, Nandrino JL: Destination memory and deception: when I lie to Barack Obama about the moon. Psychol Res 2017, Epub ahead of print.
2.
Lee TM, Liu HL, Tan LH, Chan CC, Mahankali S, Feng CM, Hou J, Fox PT, Gao JH: Lie detection by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;15:157-164.
3.
Serota KB, Levine TR, Boster FJ: The prevalence of lying in America: three studies of self-reported lies. Hum Commun Res 2010;36:2-25.
4.
Levine TR, Kim RK, Hamel LM: People lie for a reason: three experiments documenting the principle of veracity. Commun Res Rep 2010;27:271-285.
5.
Sweeney CD, Ceci SJ: Deception detection, transmission, and modality in age and sex. Front Psychol 2014;5:590.
6.
Stanley JT, Blanchard-Fields F: Challenges older adults face in detecting deceit: the role of emotion recognition. Psychol Aging 2008;23:24-32.
7.
Slessor G, Phillips LH, Bull R, Venturini C, Bonny EJ, Rokaszewicz A: Investigating the “deceiver stereotype”: do older adults associate averted gaze with deception? J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2012;67:178-183.
8.
Slessor G, Phillips LH, Ruffman T, Bailey PE, Insch P: Exploring own-age biases in deception detection. Cogn Emot 2014;28:493-506.
9.
Ruffman T, Murray J, Halberstadt J, Vater T: Age-related differences in deception. Psychol Aging 2012;27:543-549.
10.
Serota KB, Levine TR: A few prolific liars: variation in the prevalence of lying. J Lang Soc Psychol 2014;34:138-157.
11.
Debey E, De Schryver M, Logan GD, Suchotzki K, Verschuere B: From junior to senior Pinocchio: a cross-sectional lifespan investigation of deception. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2015;160:58-68.
12.
Paulhus DL: Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement: a mixed blessing? J Pers Soc Psychol 1998;74:1197-1208.
13.
Walczyk JJ, Harris LL, Duck TK, Mulay D: A social-cognitive framework for understanding serious lies: Activation-Decision-Construction-Action Theory. New Ideas Psychol 2014;34:22-36.
14.
Vrij A, Granhag PA, Porter S: Pitfalls and opportunities in nonverbal and verbal lie detection. Psychol Sci Public Interest 2010;11:89-121.
15.
Hasher L, Lustig C, Zacks R: Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention; in Conway ARA, Jarrold C, Kane MJ, Miyake A, Towse JN (eds): Variation in Working Memory. New York, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp 227-249.
16.
Collette F, Germain S, Hogge M, van der Linden M: Inhibitory control of memory in normal ageing: dissociation between impaired intentional and preserved unintentional processes. Memory 2009;17:104-122.
17.
Aschenbrenner AJ, Balota DA: Interactive effects of working memory and trial history on Stroop interference in cognitively healthy aging. Psychol Aging 2015;30:1-8.
18.
Cabeza R: Hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults: the HAROLD model. Psychol Aging 2002;17:85-100.
19.
Salthouse TA: Aging and measures of processing speed. Biol Psychol 2000;54:35-54.
20.
Walczyk JJ, Roper KS, Seemann E, Humphrey AM: Cognitive mechanisms underlying lying to questions: response time as a cue to deception. Appl Cogn Psychol 2003;17:755-774.
21.
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189-198.
22.
Eysenck HJ, Eysenck SBG: The Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory. London, University of London Press, 1964.
23.
Hathaway SR, McKinley JC: The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Manual. New York, Psychological Corporation, 1983.
24.
El Haj M, Antoine P, Nandrino JL: When deception influences memory: the implication of theory of mind. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 2017;70:1166-1173.
25.
Bhatt S, Mbwana J, Adeyemo A, Sawyer A, Hailu A, Vanmeter J: Lying about facial recognition: an fMRI study. Brain Cogn 2009;69:382-390.
26.
Aron AR, Robbins TW, Poldrack RA: Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex: one decade on. Trends Cogn Sci 2014;18:177-185.
27.
Mohamed FB, Faro SH, Gordon NJ, Platek SM, Ahmad H, Williams JM: Brain mapping of deception and truth telling about an ecologically valid situation: functional MR imaging and polygraph investigation - initial experience. Radiology 2006;238:679-688.
28.
Vartanian O, Kwantes P, Mandel DR: Lying in the scanner: localized inhibition predicts lying skill. Neurosci Lett 2012;529:18-22.
29.
Spence SA, Farrow TF, Herford AE, Wilkinson ID, Zheng Y, Woodruff PW: Behavioural and functional anatomical correlates of deception in humans. Neuroreport 2001;12:2849-2853.
30.
Carstensen LL, Turan B, Scheibe S, Ram N, Ersner-Hershfield H, Samanez-Larkin GR, Brooks KP, Nesselroade JR: Emotional experience improves with age: evidence based on over 10 years of experience sampling. Psychol Aging 2011;26:21-33.
31.
Blanchard-Fields F: Everyday problem solving and emotion: an adult developmental perspective. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2007;16:26-31.
32.
Visu-Petra L, Jurje O, Ciornei O, Visu-Petra G: Can you keep a secret? Introducing the RT-based Concealed Information Test to children. Psychol Crime Law 2016;22:276-301.
33.
Troyer AK, Leach L, Strauss E: Aging and response inhibition: normative data for the Victoria Stroop Test. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 2006;13:20-35.
34.
McCornack SA, Morrison K, Paik JE, Wisner AM, Zhu X: Information Manipulation Theory 2. J Lang Soc Psychol 2014;33:348-377.
35.
Levine TR: Truth-Default Theory (TDT). J Lang Soc Psychol 2014;33:378-392.
36.
El Haj M: Memory suppression in Alzheimer's disease. Neurol Sci 2016;37:337-343.
37.
Amieva H, Phillips LH, Della Sala S, Henry JD: Inhibitory functioning in Alzheimer's disease. Brain 2004;127:949-964.
38.
Collette F, Amieva H, Adam S, Hogge M, Van der Linden M, Fabrigoule C, Salmon E: Comparison of inhibitory functioning in mild Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. Cortex 2007;43:866-874.
39.
El Haj M, Fasotti L, Allain P: Directed forgetting of source memory in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease. Aging Clin Exp Res 2015;27:329-336.
40.
El Haj M, Gandolphe MC, Allain P, Fasotti L, Antoine P: “Forget to whom you have told this proverb”: directed forgetting of destination memory in Alzheimer's disease. Behav Neurol 2015;2015:215971.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.