The ability to detect deception is one of the most intriguing features of our minds. Cognitive load can surprisingly increase the accuracy of detection when there is a substantial load compared to when the detection is performed without cognitive load. This effect was tested in two experiments. In the first experiment, the participants were asked to watch truth/lie videos while completing a concurrent task (N‐back in a 3‐back version; intuitive processing), providing verbal reasoning after watching each video (deliberative processing), or (...) watching the videos alone (control group). The cognitive load caused by the concurrent task led to a higher accuracy in deception detection compared to the other conditions. In the second experiment, we examined how this effect worked under various amounts of cognitive load. Participants watching truth/lie videos were assigned to one of three experimental conditions (N‐back in three versions: 1, 3, and 5‐back) or to a control group. The participants in the 3‐back and 5‐back conditions exhibited a significantly higher accuracy in deception detection than those in the 1‐back and control groups. Thus, the effect of increased accuracy in deception detection is due to cognitive load and is related to the amount of cognitive load present. (shrink)

Not all of the stimuli that we encounter are unequivocal; some of them may be ambiguous. In a series of two experiments, we investigated how people perceive and assess the emotionality of the words ambiguous on three emotional spaces: valence (dimensions of positivity and negativity), origin (automaticity and reflectiveness), and activation (arousal and subjective significance). Using two types of measurement – behavioural and webcam-based eye tracking – we compared words of moderate and high ambiguity on each of those spaces with (...) control (uniequivocal) words. The behavioural measurements indicated that reaction times were significantly longer for the control words than for all the ambiguous words; the emotionality of words of ambiguous valence and origin was rated as significantly lower than the control words and words of ambiguous activation. The eye-tracking measurements indicated that words of ambiguous valence and origin caused significantly more and longer eye fixations than control words and words of ambiguous activation. The results showed the visible distinctiveness of the ambiguous words compared with the control words; they also showed differences between words of various ambiguities, verifying the proposed new model for the emotional ambiguity and presenting the behavioral and eye tracking correlates for each of the three ambiguities. (shrink)

Mixed emotions remain a fascinating, yet still understudied phenomenon. All of the previous research has focused solely on ambivalence, studying only the mix of positivity and negativity in emotions (the dimensions of valence). We sum up the already existing knowledge about the dimensional approach to ambivalence and its consequences. Based directly on this knowledge, we introduce a new theoretical model describing ambiguity in four additional dimensions (apart from valence), grouped into two bivariate spaces: origin (dimensions of automaticity and reflectiveness) and (...) activation (arousal and subjective significance). Both of these spaces have never been studied before in the context of ambiguity and mixed feelings. Future implications of the new model are discussed, including any potential impact on the methodology of research and the possible advantages in understanding and describing emotional experiences. (shrink)