Abstract
This article examines the cognitive load lie detection hypothesis. The idea that lying is more challenging than telling the truth—thus, imposing cognitive load can exacerbate the challenge liars face and expose lies. I reviewed 24 publications to flag derivation chains authors employ to justify the hypothesis. The findings indicate that authors recycle the same set of justifications but not systematically. That state of the literature shields cognitive load lie detection from severe testing in two ways. There is no clear justification to focus on when wanting to nominate or design severe tests. And the justifications contain ambiguities that make it challenging to determine what would count as a severe test of the hypothesis. I illustrate those limitations and discuss the need to make cognitive load lie detection amenable to severe testing.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
