On deception and deception detection: Content analysis of computer-mediated stated beliefs

Deception in computer-mediated communication is defined as a message knowingly and intentionally transmitted by a sender to foster a false belief or conclusion by the perceiver. Stated beliefs about deception and deceptive messages or incidents are content analyzed in a sample of 324 computer-mediated communications. Relevant stated beliefs are obtained through systematic sampling and querying of the blogosphere based on 80 English words commonly used to describe deceptive incidents. Deception is conceptualized broader than lying and includes a variety of deceptive strategies: falsification, concealment (omitting material facts) and equivocation (dodging or skirting issues). The stated beliefs are argued to be valuable toward the creation of a unified multi-faceted ontology of deception, stratified along several classificatory facets such as (1) contextual domain (e.g., personal relations, politics, finances & insurance), (2) deception content (e.g., events, time, place, abstract notions), (3) message format (e.g., a complaint: they lied to us, a victim story: I was lied to or tricked, or a direct accusation: you're lying), and (4) deception variety, each tied to particular verbal cues (e.g., misinforming, scheming, misrepresenting, or cheating). The paper positions automated deception detection within the field of library and information science (LIS), as a feasible natural language processing (NLP) task. Key findings and important constructs in deception research from interpersonal communication, psychology, criminology, and language technology studies are synthesized into an overview. Deception research is juxtaposed to several benevolent constructs in LIS research: trust, credibility, certainty, and authority.

[1]  B. Depaulo,et al.  Beliefs About Cues to Deception: Mindless Stereotypes or Untapped Wisdom? , 1999 .

[2]  James J. Lindsay,et al.  The Accuracy-Confidence Correlation in the Detection of Deception , 1997, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[3]  Eileen Fitzpatrick,et al.  Verification and Implementation of Language-Based Deception Indicators in Civil and Criminal Narratives , 2008, COLING.

[4]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Interpersonal Deception Theory , 1996 .

[5]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Using Speech Act Profiling for Deception Detection , 2004, ISI.

[6]  Jack G. Conrad,et al.  Professional credibility: authority on the web , 2008, WICOW '08.

[7]  Victoria L. Rubin Trust Incident Account Model: Preliminary Indicators for Trust Rhetoric and Trust or Distrust in Blogs , 2009, ICWSM.

[8]  R. Koestner,et al.  Beliefs about cues associated with deception , 1981 .

[9]  J. Nunamaker,et al.  Automating Linguistics-Based Cues for Detecting Deception in Text-Based Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communications , 2004 .

[10]  Rick L. Wilson,et al.  Decision support for determining veracity via linguistic-based cues , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..

[11]  A. Worsley Perceived reliability of sources of health information , 1989 .

[12]  Jacquelyn A. Burkell,et al.  Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the Web , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  James J. Lindsay,et al.  Cues to deception. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[14]  Richard Wiseman,et al.  The megalab truth test , 1995, Nature.

[15]  Thomas Hugh Feeley,et al.  Individual and Small Group Accuracy in Judging Truthful and Deceptive Communication , 2004 .

[16]  Stephen Marsh,et al.  The role of trust in information science and technology , 2005, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[17]  Jeffrey T. Hancock,et al.  On Lying and Being Lied To: A Linguistic Analysis of Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication , 2007 .

[18]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  The elements of computer credibility , 1999, CHI '99.

[19]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Qualitative Analysis For Social Scientists , 1987 .

[20]  Lillian Lee,et al.  Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis , 2008, Found. Trends Inf. Retr..

[21]  Thomas Hugh Feeley,et al.  To Catch a Liar: Challenges for Research in Lie Detection Training , 2003 .

[22]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[23]  Jacob Cohen A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[24]  Kenneth R. Fleischmann,et al.  Trust in digital information , 2008 .

[25]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Interpersonal Deception VII , 1994 .

[26]  Elizabeth D. Liddy,et al.  Assessing Credibility of Weblogs , 2006, AAAI Spring Symposium: Computational Approaches to Analyzing Weblogs.

[27]  B. Depaulo,et al.  Spotting Lies: Can Humans Learn to Do Better? , 1994 .

[28]  WolzUrsula,et al.  Computer-mediated communication in collaborative educational settings , 1997 .

[29]  Louise F. Spiteri,et al.  A simplified model for facet analysis : Ranganathan 101 , 1998 .

[30]  Dongsong Zhang,et al.  Following linguistic footprints: automatic deception detection in online communication , 2008, CACM.

[31]  Pamela J. McKenzie Justifying Cognitive Authority Decisions: Discursive Strategies of Information Seekers , 2003, Library quarterly.

[32]  Aldert Vrij,et al.  Why professionals fail to catch liars and how they can improve , 2004 .

[33]  Victoria L. Rubin Epistemic modality: From uncertainty to certainty in the context of information seeking as interactions with texts , 2010, Inf. Process. Manag..

[34]  Leif A. Strömwall,et al.  Imprisoned knowledge: Criminals' beliefs about deception , 2004 .

[35]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[36]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  Interpersonal deception: V. Accuracy in deception detection , 1994 .

[37]  Zhi Chen,et al.  Computer-mediated communication in collaborative educational settings (report of the ITiCSE 1997 working group on CMC in collaborative educational settings) , 1997, ITiCSE-WGR.

[38]  Jacob Palme,et al.  Computer mediated communication in collaborative educational settings (panel) , 1997, Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education.

[39]  Patricia Noller,et al.  Decoding deception: A look at the process , 1988 .

[40]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[41]  Robert Hopper,et al.  Broadening the deception construct , 1984 .