Automated Linguistic Analysis of Deceptive and Truthful Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication

Hancock, Jeffrey T.; Curry, Lauren E.; Goorha, Saurabh; Woodworth, Michael

doi:10.1109/hicss.2005.111

Cited by 47 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of researchers have attempted through experimental designs to identify language features in written messages that signal the presence of deception (Burgoon et al, 2003;Hancock et al, 2005;Yoo & Gretzel, 2008;Zhou, Burgoon, Nunamaker, & Twitchell, 2004;Zhou & Sung, 2008). Comparing messages containing lies with those that are honest attempts to identify the language features unique to each.…”

Section: Deceptionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The perceived usefulness of blog postings: An extension of the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Deceptionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Although managed travel blogs like TripAdvisor. com take precautions to limit deception, deceptive postings are possible (Yoo & Gretzel, 2008) and have been identified as far from rare from interpersonal communication (Vrij, 2000) to online dating services (Hancock, Curry, Goorha, & Woodworth, 2005).…”

Section: Deceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The perceived usefulness of blog postings: An extension of the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It may be that in the absence of witnesses, deceivers feel freer to construct an entire world of the lie in order to be convincing. This verbose but vague strategy has been identified previously in interpersonal contexts (Anolli, Balconi & Ciceri, 2002;Buller & Burgoon, 1994;Dulany, 1982;Hancock, Curry, Goorha & Woodworth, 2005;Knapp, Hart & Dennis, 1974;Kuiken 1981), and is specifically associated with addressing silent or acquiescent addressees (Anolli, Balconi & Ciceri, 2002). The impersonal approach has also been identified in interpersonal communication in previous research (Balconi & Ciceri, 2002;Buller & Burgoon, 1994).…”

Section: Linguistic Deception Strategies In Written Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing Deception in Written Witness Statements

Picornell

2013

LESLI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Written witness statements are a unique source for the study of high-stakes textual deception. To date, however, there is no distinction in the way that they and other forms of verbal deception have been analysed, with written statements treated as extensions of transcribed versions of oral reports. Given the highly context-dependent nature of cues, it makes sense to take the characteristics of the medium into account when analysing for deceptive language. This study examines the characteristic features of witness narratives and proposes a new approach to search for deception cues. Narratives are treated as a progression of episodes over time, and deception as a progression of acts over time. This allows for the profiling of linguistic bundles in sequence, revealing the statements' internal gradient, and deceivers' choice of deceptive linguistic strategy. Study results suggest that, at least in the context of written witness statements, the weighting of individual features as deception cues is not static but depends on their interaction with other cues, and that detecting deceivers' use of linguistic strategy is an effective vehicle for identifying deception.Keywords: detecting deception; witness statements; narratives; linguistic strategy; text analysis. Analysing Deception in Written Witness StatementsTo date, the information we have regarding behavioural cues to deception has been largely obtained from laboratory-based experiments dealing with low-consequence lies and psychological perspectives as to how liars should behave when lying. Their success is difficult to quantify as no one has yet identified a single cue, or set of cues, that is consistently identified with deception. DePaulo et al. (2003) suggest that behavioural cues to deception are normally faint unless liars are highly motivated to lie. They are thought to be more motivated to succeed with their deception when the consequences of being caught out are serious; being burdened by guilt at their transgression, or worry about implications to their reputation, or fear of imprisonment should the truth be revealed, results in more obvious behavioural cues which betray deceptive intentions. Such motivation is rarely found in the

show abstract

“…Some deception studies [1]- [3] extracted the linguistic features from the text of deceptive communication, which demonstrated superior performance to human detector. Some spam and fraud detection studies [4]- [6] used structural features of online social networks, nevertheless, such studies have rarely addressed the issue of deception in CMC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of features for automatic deception detection in synchronous computer-mediated communication

Pak

Zhou

2015

2015 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research aims to compare the performance of automatic deception detection in synchronous computermediated communication (CMC) with and without incorporating structural features. In addition, the development of deception detection models draws on the linguistic features that have been widely studied in the online deception literature. The results suggest that structural features can be effective in detecting deception and combining the structural features with linguistic features can improve the performance of detecting deception.

show abstract

Automated Linguistic Analysis of Deceptive and Truthful Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication

Cited by 47 publications

References 16 publications

The perceived usefulness of blog postings: An extension of the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm

The perceived usefulness of blog postings: An extension of the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm

Analysing Deception in Written Witness Statements

A comparison of features for automatic deception detection in synchronous computer-mediated communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About