Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 9:13:1047427.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1047427. eCollection 2022.

Development of a Chinese werewolf deception database

Affiliations

Development of a Chinese werewolf deception database

Chaocao Yang et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Although it is important to accurately detect deception, limited research in this area has been undertaken involving Asian people. We aim to address this gap by undertaking research regarding the identification of deception in Asians in realistic environments. In this study, we develop a Chinese Werewolf Deception Database (C2W2D), which consists of 168 video clips (84 deception videos and 84 honest videos). A total of 1,738,760 frames of facial data are recorded. Fifty-eight healthy undergraduates (24 men and 34 women) and 26 drug addicts (26 men) participated in a werewolf game. The development of C2W2D is accomplished based on a "werewolf" deception game paradigm in which the participants spontaneously tell the truth or a lie. Two synced high-speed cameras are used to capture the game process. To explore the differences between lying and truth-telling in the database, descriptive statistics (e.g., duration and quantity) and hypothesis tests are conducted using action units (AUs) of facial expressions (e.g., t-test). The C2W2D contributes to a relatively sizable number of deceptive and honest samples with high ecological validity. These samples can be used to study the individual differences and the underlying mechanisms of lies and truth-telling between drug addicts and healthy people.

Keywords: cross-culture; deception database; ecological validity; emotion; facial expression; individual difference; video.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
(A) The layout of the recording room. Two cameras record the entire game process. The 12 undergraduates or 6–8 addicts sit in front of the camera. Each camera separately captures six undergraduates (three or four addicts). (B) The process of one game round. The night and day are looped until one game round had ended.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Number of action units (AUs) indicating lying and truth-telling.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
The contour line plot shows the distribution of action units (AUs) per player. (A) The distribution of lying AUs per player. (B) The distribution of truth-telling AUs per player. P1–P90: The ranking of the players. P1–P60 are healthy undergraduates, P61–P90 are drug addicts. P19, P21, P69, and P76–P78 are precluded in this sequence.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
(A) Mean presence. (B) Mean intensity. Statistically significant differences between lying and truth-telling: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001.

Similar articles

References

    1. Al-Simadi F. A. (2000). Detection of deceptive behavior: A cross-cultural test. Soc. Behav. Pers. 28 455–461. 10.2224/sbp.2000.28.5.455 - DOI
    1. Belot M., Bhaskar V., van de Ven J. (2010). Promises and cooperation: Evidence from a TV game show. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 73 396–405.
    1. Bond C. F., DePaulo B. M. (2006). Accuracy of Deception Judgments. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 10 214–234. 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Borza D., Itu R., Danescu R. (2018). In the eye of the deceiver: analyzing eye movements as a cue to deception. J. Imaging 4:120. 10.3390/jimaging4100120 - DOI
    1. Burgoon J. K., Metaxas D., Nunamaker J. F., Ge S. (2021). “Cultural influence on deceptive communication,” in Detecting Trust and Deception in Group Interaction, eds Subrahmanian V. S., Burgoon J. K., Dunbar N. E. (Cham: Springer International Publishing; ), 197–222. 10.1007/978-3-030-54383-9_11 - DOI