TENDENCY TO DECEPTION AND SELF-DECEPTION IN INDIVIDUALS WITH DIFFERENT CHARACTER ACCENTUATIONS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/psy-2026-7-4

Keywords:

deception, self-deception, character accentuations, Leonhard's typology, deceptive behavior, SDQ, psychocorrection

Abstract

The article presents results of an empirical study examining the relationship between character accentuation types and the tendency toward deception and self-deception. The theoretical basis includes the evolutionary-psychological concept of self-deception by W. von Hippel and R. Trivers, the social-cognitive approach of B.M. DePaulo and A. Vrij, and K. Leonhard's typological concept. Deception is viewed as a multicomponent phenomenon with cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and motivational dimensions; self-deception as a process of motivated distortion of self-perception beyond the subject's full awareness. Key forms of self-deception identified include denial, rationalization, positive illusions, projection, and motivated reasoning. The study involved 47 participants (aged 18–58). Three psychodiagnostic instruments were used: K. Leonhard–H. Schmieschek Character Questionnaire, O.Yu. Kosianova's «Types and Motives of Deception» questionnaire, and O.Yu. Kosianova's Ukrainian-language adaptation of the SDQ (2025). Statistical analysis employed descriptive statistics and correlational analysis (Spearman's coefficient, Shapiro-Wilk test) in SPSS. The reputation-preservation motive was found to correlate significantly and positively with five accentuation types: pedantic (ρ = +0.537), excitable (ρ = +0.523), hyperthymic (ρ = +0.491), anxious (ρ = +0.388), and emotive (ρ = +0.348); the manipulation motive showed inverse associations with dystyhmic (ρ = −0.457), excitable, pedantic, and hyperthymic accentuations. The most robust finding regarding types of deception is a negative correlation between «self-justification» and six accentuation types (hyperthymic, excitable, pedantic, emotive, anxious, and demonstrative), suggesting that carriers of these types rely on typologically conditioned defense mechanisms rather than overt self-justification. Associations between accentuations and SDQ self-deception scores were limited; elevated overall self-deception was found specifically among individuals with the exalted accentuation type. The findings expand knowledge of personality determinants of deceptive behavior and support the typological approach in psychodiagnostics and psychocorrection. A psychocorrective program «Authenticity Without a Mask» has been developed, targeting deceptive behavior correction in accordance with the individual's accentuation profile.

References

Косьянова О.Ю. Адаптація українномовної версії опитувальника самообману (SDQ). Результати психометричного аналізу SDQ. Наукові записки. Серія: Психологія. 2025. № 4. С. 43–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/cusu-psy-2025-4-5.

Косьянова О.Ю., Андреадакі А. Роль акцентуацій характеру у формуванні адаптивних стратегій подолання стресових ситуацій. Наука і освіта. 2025. № 2. 30–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2414-4665-2025-2-4.

Bozoglu G., Dereboy C., Dereboy I. F. Character accentuations and psychological defenses in a non-clinical sample. Personality and Individual Differences. 2022. Vol. 184. Article 111214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111214.

DePaulo B.M., Kashy D.A., Kirkendol S.E., Wyer M.M., Epstein J.A. Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996. Vol. 70. № 5. Р. 979–995. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.979.

DePaulo B.M., Lindsay J.J., Malone B.E., Muhlenbruck L., Charlton K., Cooper H. Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin. 2003. Vol. 129, № 1. Р. 74–118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74.

Ekman P. Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage. New York : Norton, 1985. 390 p.

Ekman P., Friesen W.V. Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception. Psychiatry. 1969. Vol. 32, № 1. Р. 88–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1969.11023575.

Makowski D., Pham T., Lau Z. J., Brammer J. C., Lespinasse F., Pham H., Schötzel C., Chen S. H. A. NeuroKit2: A Python toolbox for neurophysiological signal processing. Behavior Research Methods. 2021. Vol. 53. Р. 1689–1696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01516-y.

Sackeim H. A., Gur R. C. Self-confrontation and psychopathology. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1978. Vol. 35, № 10. Р. 1180–1184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1978.01770340062005.

Sackeim H. A., Gur R. C. Self-deception, other-deception, and self-reported psychopathology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1979. Vol. 47, № 1. Р. 213–215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.47.1.213.

Taylor S.E., Brown J.D. Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin. 1988. Vol. 103. № 2. Р. 193–210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193.

von Hippel W., Trivers R. The evolution and psychology of self-deception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2011. Vol. 34, № 1. Р. 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10001354.

Vrij A. Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities. 2nd ed. Chichester : Wiley, 2008. 448 p.

Published

2026-05-30