Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 29, Issue 1 , Pages 35-41, January 2008

No enhanced memory for faces of cheaters

Department of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany

Received 21 December 2006; received in revised form 18 July 2007 published online 22 November 2007.

Abstract 

Mealey, Daood, and Krage (1996) reported that faces associated with an episode of cheating were better recognized than faces associated with irrelevant behavior, which, in turn, were recognized better than faces associated with an episode of trustworthiness. This pattern of findings was interpreted in favor of the social contract theory, which postulates that humans are equipped with brain mechanisms specialized in detecting cheaters in social interactions. We explicate a number of problems with the original findings and in this article report a series of three experiments designed to replicate the original findings under conditions that take those problems into account. Consistent across all experiments, old–new recognition for faces associated with a history of cheating was not better than recognition for faces associated with a history of trustworthiness. The present findings cast doubt as to the validity and interpretation of the findings reported by Mealey et al.

Keywords: Cheater detection, Memory

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1090-5138(07)00084-0

doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.08.001

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 29, Issue 1 , Pages 35-41, January 2008