Research will be continued on the development of a model of successful communicative performances. Previous research has shown that when people are highly motivated to convey a false impression of themselves, they are less successful at doing so whenever observers can see or hear any of their nonverbal cues. It is hypothesized that persons who have chronically high expectations for success in interpersonal situations will be less impaired than others by inductions of high motivation to succeed or by specific situational inductions of low expectations for success. Further, people who are accustomed to being the objects of public scrutiny should be more adept than others at controlling their visual nonverbal behaviors, and their communicative performances should be less disrupted in specific situations in which their behavior is being scrutinized by others. Physically attractive persons fit all of these criteria. It is proposed that attractive people are not only more skilled communicatively, but that they are also more advantaged (e.g., the targets of their ingratiating lies would like to believe those lies). Three tests are proposed of the conditions under which this interpersonal advantage effect is most likely to occur. An extension of the motivational impairment hypothesis leads to the prediction that when people are especially motivated to reassure a target person, they will be less successful at doing so whenever the target person can observe the senders' nonverbal cues. The role of clinical skill and experience in moderating this effect will be examined. It is also predicted that senders will be especially likely spontaneously to offer false reassurances when (a) they like the target person; (b) they believe that the target person has no objective way of knowing that their reassurances are feigned; and (c) the target person is especially insecure. Studies are also proposed to test the hypothesis that insecure people (a) behave in ways that elicit false and unconvincing reassurances from others, and that (b) they are especially sensitive to the insincerity of feigned positive feedback. Finally, work will be continued toward the development of a taxonomy of deceptions and of reasons for deceiving.
