edit ms to align discussion with results

paper/manuscript.Rmd

@@ -264,9 +264,9 @@ knitr::include_graphics("../figures/figure2.png")
 
 <!-- While there is an extensive body of literature associating deception with social cognition and emotion regulation, most research had been focused on their roles in deception detection, leaving a paucity in studies pertaining to their influence on lying ability.  -->
 
-The present study examined the contribution of ToM and interoception on our ability to lie using a directed lie paradigm with two conditions ("Interrogation" and "Polygraph") designed to enhance each of the two mechanisms. Interestingly, we found that when participants were presented with (fake) physiological feedback (the polygraph condition), instead of a face of a person they had to lie to (the interrogation condition), their response time for both lies and truths increased, as did their heart rate. Although the condition did not impact the subjective confidence that participants had in their answers, it suggests that believing oneself to be submitted to a machine that is supposedly able to detect deception by interpreting physiological signals is a harder and/or more stressful condition than lying to a person. While research linking interoception and deception is limited, our results are in line with studies that show an association between interoceptive awareness and anxiety [@yoris2015roles; @garfinkel2013interoception; @domschke2010interoceptive]. Specifically, enhancing one's attention towards their internal bodily signals could have resulted in a hyper-vigilance towards physiological sensations that is perceived negatively. This is consistent with previous deception detection studies, in which participants' spontaneous lying behaviour only decreased when they were given feedback by a polygraph machine, but not when no feedback was given [@peleg2019lie]. By extension, our study adds to the controversial discourse surrounding the use of physiological measures in past deception research, further questioning its validity as an indicator of deception [@rosky2013f; @oviatt2018handbook].
-
+The present study examined the contribution of ToM and interoception on our ability to lie using a directed lie paradigm with two conditions ("Interrogation" and "Polygraph") designed to enhance each of the two mechanisms. Interestingly, we found that when participants' responses were perceived to be evaluated by a person (the interrogation condition), instead of (fake) lie detection machine (the polygraph condition), their response time for both lies and truths were faster, and their heart rate was elevated. Although the condition did not impact the subjective confidence that participants had in their answers, the pattern of results suggests that believing one's response is being evaluated by a person, instead of a machine, could induce more fear, consequently speeding up the response and increasing the physiological arousal [@aylward2017impact]. Alternatively, the slower response in the polygraph condition could be explained by the established attentional switching hypothesis, which posits that an increase in attention towards internal signals and managing one's emotional reaction would confer less cognitive resources available, thereby resulting in individuals taking a longer time to respond [@arnold2019interoception; @hanania2010selective]. Individual differences in their interoceptive and ToM abilities further modulated the reported confidence, response time and physiological arousal in each condition.
 
+<!-- While research linking interoception and deception is limited, our results are in line with studies that show an association between interoceptive awareness and anxiety [@yoris2015roles; @garfinkel2013interoception; @domschke2010interoceptive]. Specifically, enhancing one's attention towards their internal bodily signals could have resulted in a hyper-vigilance towards physiological sensations that is perceived negatively. This is consistent with previous deception detection studies, in which participants' spontaneous lying behaviour only decreased when they were given feedback by a polygraph machine, but not when no feedback was given [@peleg2019lie]. By extension, our study adds to the controversial discourse surrounding the use of physiological measures in past deception research, further questioning its validity as an indicator of deception [@rosky2013f; @oviatt2018handbook]. -->
 
 <!-- This hence confers support for the manipulation used in our experimental paradigm, demonstrating that increasing the attentional focus towards visual interoceptive cues, even if they are fake, can elicit interoceptive awareness and enhance the precision of internal signals if such external cues of interoceptive signals are perceived to be real. Extending previous research pertaining to the application of interoceptive training for improving emotion regulation [@sugawara2020effects; @quadt2021interoceptive; @wu2022enhanced], our study thus provides evidence that interoceptive awareness can be manipulated and thereby modified to guide our emotional responses. -->
 
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ Our results suggest that higher ToM abilities were related to slower and less co
 <!-- ionship between ToM and deception in contexts where interoceptive abilities are emphasized, the observed effects are in line with studies that suggest negative links associating ToM with interoceptive sensibility (i.e., the self-perceived tendency to monitor internal signals) [@canino2022embodiment].  -->
 
 <!-- Interoception -->
-We also showed that interoceptive abilities (as indicated by the composite interoception scores) are correlated with a higher confidence in one's lies in the polygraph condition, a condition in which the attention towards internal reactions is fostered. Indeed, this is in line with previous studies that found individuals with low interoception were more averse to risk when reputational stakes were high, telling fewer egoistical lies [@vabba2022interoceptive]. In fact, @vabba2022interoceptive further reported that people with high interoception abilities were less likely to differ in risk-taking tendencies, telling the same number of lies regardless of the social stakes. Consistent with our results, @von2023social found that individuals with high interoceptive accuracy were more likely to make egocentric decisions. However, in contrast to previous studies [@pinna2020systematic; @fustos2013embodiment; @owens2018investigating; @pollatos2007heart], we did not find any significant relationship between individuals' interoception scores and their heart rate changes during their answers. This points toward a predominantly meta-cognitive effect without necessarily an actual bodily regulation (i.e., participants with good interoception feel that their lies are more convincing, but do not actively attenuate their bodily reactions). 
+We also found that interoceptive abilities (as indicated by the composite interoception scores) are correlated with a higher confidence in one's lies in the polygraph condition, a condition in which the attention towards internal reactions is fostered. Indeed, this is in line with previous studies that found individuals with low interoception were more averse to risk when reputational stakes were high, telling fewer egoistical lies [@vabba2022interoceptive]. In fact, @vabba2022interoceptive further reported that people with high interoception abilities were less likely to differ in risk-taking tendencies, telling the same number of lies regardless of the social stakes. Consistent with our results, @von2023social found that individuals with high interoceptive accuracy were more likely to make egocentric decisions. However, in contrast to previous studies [@pinna2020systematic; @fustos2013embodiment; @owens2018investigating; @pollatos2007heart], we did not find any significant relationship between individuals' interoception scores and their heart rate changes during their answers. This points toward a predominantly meta-cognitive effect without necessarily an actual bodily regulation (i.e., participants with good interoception feel that their lies are more convincing, but do not actively attenuate their bodily reactions). 
 
 Another possibility that should be tested in the future is that of a mediating role of executive functions, given their association with lying [e.g., @battista2021role; @abe2007deceiving] and interoception [@molnar2022anterior]. For instance, neuroscientific findings investigating the correlates of interoception have underlined the potential role of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and anterior insula (AI) [@wang2019anterior; @craig2009you; @critchley2004neural; @khalsa2009pathways], both of which are often thought to be activated during deception [@abe2011brain; @sip2008detecting; @baumgartner2013honest], and have been implicated in cognitive processes associated with deception [such as cognitive control, @molnar2022anterior; or conflict detection, @kerns2004anterior]. It is thus possible that the positive relationship between interoceptive abilities and deception is at least partially mediated by cognitive control abilities. 
 

paper/references.bib

@@ -7,6 +7,17 @@ @article{rubin2003belief
   year      = {2003},
   publisher = {Springer}
 }
+@article{aylward2017impact,
+  title={The impact of induced anxiety on affective response inhibition},
+  author={Aylward, Jessica and Valton, Vincent and Goer, Franziska and Mkrtchian, Anahit and Lally, N{\'\i}all and Peters, Sarah and Limbachya, Tarun and Robinson, Oliver J},
+  journal={Royal Society Open Science},
+  volume={4},
+  number={6},
+  pages={170084},
+  year={2017},
+  publisher={The Royal Society Publishing}
+}
+
 @article{battista2021role,
   title={The role of executive functions in the effects of lying on memory},
   author={Battista, Fabiana and Otgaar, Henry and Mangiulli, Ivan and Curci, Antonietta},