@article{ref1,
title="Faking interrogative suggestiblity: The truth machine",
journal="Legal and criminological psychology",
year="2002",
author="Baxter, James S. and Bain, Stella A.",
volume="7",
number="2",
pages="219-225",
abstract="Purpose. The aim of the present study was to investigate possible indicators of malingering or 'faking bad' on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales. It was hypothesized that participants who were issued with a set of instructions that primed them to appear gullible and susceptible to pressure would exhibit a unique pattern of scores on the scales that would differentiate them from both normal adults and genuinely vulnerable populations.Methods. The study had a single factor between participants design. Participants were tested in either one of two conditions: standard or faking. Forty-two participants took part in the study. Participants were a mix of undergraduates, postgraduate students, and professionals.Results. Only Yield 1 scores were found to be significantly different between the two conditions. Participants in the faking condition gained higher scores on this measure on both the GSS 1 and GSS 2.Conclusions. Results indicate that whilst fakers may identify the need to yield to leading questions as a strategy for faking interrogative suggestibility, they do not identify the need to make shifts in their responses. An elevated Yield 1 score in the absence of any other raised scores on the scales may therefore be indicative of faking bad on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales.<p /><p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1355-3259",
doi="10.1348/135532502760274819",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/135532502760274819"
}