Expert susceptibility to deception when discriminating between genuine and deceptive actions

The overarching aim of the current research programme was to gain further insight into expertise and perception of deception. In particular, expert athletes’ susceptibility to deception. In order to achieve this, four experimental studies were conducted, each of which addressed a specific research question. In the first study, rugby players’ susceptibility to, and detection of, deception were examined using earlier times of occlusion than previous perception research. In doing so, it was the first study to examine performer susceptibility to deception. All rugby players, regardless of expertise, were susceptible to deception. Although, experts were less susceptible and displayed a greater ability to detect deception as an action unfolded. The second study examined skill-based differences in perception of deception using the temporal occlusion paradigm. Specifically, how the expert perceptual advantage translated to full-body responses and whether realistic responses provide a more sensitive measure of deception. Analysis of physical responses showed that high-skilled players were less susceptible to deception than recreational players. Moreover, high-skilled players were able to detect deceptive intent earlier than recreational players, reflected by more effective full-body responses. The third study investigated the kinematic differences between deceptive and genuine actions during the time window in which players are susceptible to deception. Statistical Parameter Mapping analysis indicated that to deceive an opponent, expert performers use a combination of exaggerated and minimised cues, relative to the kinematics of genuine actions, prior to the initial fake change of direction. From the differences between actions, candidates for the cause(s) of deception were proposed. The final study examined the effect of systematically exaggerated kinematics on the ability to discriminate between genuine and deceptive actions. Through the use of linear morphed motion capture data, it was revealed that players were more susceptible to deception when the kinematics of the movement were exaggerated and that skill groups were equally sensitive to exaggerated cues. In addition, high-skilled players were more able to discriminate between actions and less biased toward judging actions to be of genuine intent, relative to recreational players. These findings have implications from a theoretical perspective by reconceptualising athlete perception of deception, as well as an applied perspective concerning coaching and training practice. It is concluded that future research should explore the influence ii of segmental parameters, perceptual training interventions, and how postural cues and exaggeration combine with contextual information.