Judgments of honest and deceptive communication in art forgery controversies: two field studies testing truth-default theory's projected motive model in Korea

Abstract

Two field studies investigated people's inferences about the honesty or deceptiveness of two Korean artists whose work may or may not have been forged. Based on the projective motive model from truth-default theory, it was anticipated that judgments of honesty would be impacted by people's perceptions of the artist's apparent motive for lying. The results of both studies were consistent with the importance of apparent motives. The role of internal attributions was also assessed for veracity judgment. Internal attributions may be more common as explanations for honesty than deception. The data provide additional evidence of the cross-cultural applicability of truth-default theory.