Beliefs about cues to deception: Mindless stereotypes or untapped wisdom?

In this longitudinal study, senders told truths and lies to same-sex friends (judges) at both one month and six months into the relationship. judges guessed whether the stories were truths or lies, and described the cues they used to make their decisions. These cues were coded into categories according to the nature of the cue (verbal, visual, or paralinguistic). Judges mentioned more verbal cues when the story was truthful than when it was fabricated, and mentioned more visual nonverbal cues when it was fabricated than when it was truthful. Therefore, perceivers' stated beliefs about cues discriminated the truths from the lies, although their explicit judgments of deceptiveness did not. Perceivers who mentioned visual or verbal cues more often were not more accurate at detecting deception (explicitly), but those who mentioned paralinguistic cues more often were more accurate.