research-article

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

Author:

Victoria L. RubinAuthors Info & Claims

ASIS&T '10: Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem - Volume 47

October 2010

Article No.: 32, Pages 1 - 10

Published: 22 October 2010 Publication History

Abstract

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.

References

[1]

Anderson, D. E., DePaulo, B. M., Ansfield, M. E., Tickle, J. J., and Green, E. 1999. Beliefs About Cues to Deception: Mindless Stereotypes or Untapped Wisdom? Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 23(1): 67--89.

[2]

Bachenko, J., Fitzpatrick, E., and Schonwetter, M. 2008. Verification and Implementation of Language-Based Deception Indicators in Civil and Criminal Narratives, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Manchester, UK: ACL.

Digital Library

[3]

Buller, D. B., and Burgoon, J. K. 1996. Interpersonal Deception Theory. Communication Theory, 6(3): 203--242.

[4]

Burgoon, J. K., and Buller, D. B. 1994. Interpersonal Deception: V. Accuracy in Deception Detection. Communication Monographs, 61(4): 303.

[5]

Cohen, J. 1960. A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Educat. & Psych. Measurement, 20, 37--46.

[6]

Conrad, J. G., Leidner, J., and Schilder, F. 2008. Professional Credibility: Authority on the Web. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Information Credibility on the Web (WICOW08), Napa, CA.

Digital Library

[7]

DePaulo, B. M. 1994. Spotting Lies: Can Humans Learn to Do Better? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3: 83--86.

[8]

DePaulo, B. M., Charlton, K., Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., and Muhlenbruck, L. 1997. The Accuracy-Confidence Correlation in the Detection of Deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(4): 346--357.

[9]

DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., and Cooper, H. 2003. Cues to Deception. Psychological Bulletin 129(1): 74--118.

[10]

Fogg, B. J., and Tseng, H. 1999. The Elements of Computer Credibility. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: the CHI is the limit, Pittsburgh: ACM.

Digital Library

[11]

Frank, M. G., and Feeley, T. H. 2003. To Catch a Liar: Challenges for Research in Lie Detection Training. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 31(1): 58--75.

[12]

Frank, M. G., Paolantinio, N., Feeley, T. H., and Servoss, T. J. 2004. Individual and Small Group Accuracy in Judging Truthful and Deceptive Communication. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13: 45--59.

[13]

Fuller, C. M., Biros, D. P., and Wilson, R. L. 2009. Decision Support for Determining Veracity Via Linguistic-Based Cues Decision Support Systems 46(3): 695--703.

Digital Library

[14]

Granhag, P. A., Andersson, L. O., Strömwall, L. A., and Hartwig, M. 2004. Imprisoned Knowledge: Criminals Beliefs About Deception. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9(1): 103.

[15]

Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan. eds. Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts: 41--58. New York: Academic Press.

[16]

Hancock, J. T., Curry, L. E., Goorha, S., and Woodworth, M. 2008. On Lying and Being Lied To: A Linguistic Analysis of Deception in Computer-Mediated Communication. Discourse Processes, 45(1): 1--23.

[17]

Hopper, R., and Bell, R. A. 1984. Broadening the Deception Construct. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(3): 288--302.

[18]

Hurd, K., and Noller, P. 1988. Decoding Deception: A Look at the Process. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12(3): 217--233.

[19]

Kelton, K., Fleischmann, K. R., and Wallace, W. A. 2008. Trust in Digital Information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(3): 363--374.

Digital Library

[20]

Krippendorff, K. 2004. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

[21]

Landis, J., & Koch, G. G. 1977. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33: 159--174.

[22]

Marsh, S., and Dibben, M. R. 2003. The Role of Trust in Information Science and Technology. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37(1): 465--498.

[23]

McKenzie, P. J. 2003. Justifying Cognitive Authority Decisions: Discursive Strategies of Information Seekers. The Library Quarterly, 73(3): 261--288.

[24]

McMillan, S. J. 2009. The Challenge of Applying Content Analysis for the World Wide Web. In K. Krippendorff and M. A. Bock. eds. Content Analysis Reader: 60--67. LA, CA: Sage.

[25]

Michel de Montaigne. 1572--1580/2003. The Complete Essays of Montaigne, Translated by Donald M. Frame. New York: Knopf.

[26]

Pang, B., and Lee, L. 2008. Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 2(1--2): 1--135.

Digital Library

[27]

Rubin, V. L. 2009. Trust Incident Account Model: Preliminary Indicators for Trust Rhetoric and Trust or Distrust in Blogs. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-2009), San Jose, CA: AAAI Press.

[28]

Rubin, V. L. 2010. Epistemic Modality: From Uncertainty to Certainty in the Context of Information Seeking as Interactions with Texts. Information Processing & Management, 46: 533--540.

Digital Library

[29]

Rubin, V. L., and Liddy, E. 2006. Assessing Credibility of Weblogs. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Computational Approaches to Analyzing Weblogs (CAAW-2006), Stanford, CA: AAAI Press.

[30]

Spiteri, L. 1998. A Simplified Model for Facet Analysis. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 23: 1--30.

[31]

Strauss, A. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[32]

Twitchell, D. P., Nunamaker, J. F., and Burgoon, J. K. 2004. Using Speech Act Profiling for Deception Detection. Intel. & Security Informatics: 403--410.

[33]

Vrij, A. 2004. Why Professionals Fail to Catch Liars and How They Can Improve. Legal and criminological psychology, 9(2): 159--181.

[34]

Wathen, C. N., and Burkell, J. 2002. Believe It or Not: Factors Influencing Credibility on the Web. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 53(2): 134--144.

Digital Library

[35]

Wiseman, R. 1995. The Megalab Truth Test. Nature, 373: 391.

[36]

Wolz, U., Walker, H., Palme, J., Anderson, P., Chen, Z., Dunne, J., Karlsson, G., Laribi, A., Mannikko, S., and Spielvogel, R. 1997. Computer-Mediated Communication in Collaborative Educational Settings. SIGCUE Outlook, 25: 51--68.

Digital Library

[37]

Worsley, A. 1989. Perceived Reliability of Sources of Health Information. Health Educ. Res., 4(3): 367--6

[38]

Zhou, L., Burgoon, J. K., Nunamaker, J. F., and Twitchell, D. 2004. Automating Linguistics-Based Cues for Detecting Deception in Text-Based Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communications. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13(1): 81--106.

[39]

Zhou, L., and Zhang, D. 2008. Following Linguistic Footprints: Automatic Deception Detection in Online Communication. Communications of the ACM, 51(9): 119--122.

Digital Library

[40]

Zuckerman, M., Koestner, R., and Driver, R. 1981. Beliefs About Cues Associated with Deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 6(2): 105--114.

Cited By

Sakhnini NChattopadhyay D(2022)A Review of Smartphone Fact-Checking Apps and their (Non) Use Among Older AdultsAdjunct Publication of the 24th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services10.1145/3528575.3551448(1-8)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3528575.3551448
Xu FSheng VWang M(2021)A Unified Perspective for Disinformation Detection and Truth Discovery in Social Sensing: A SurveyACM Computing Surveys10.1145/347713855:1(1-33)Online publication date: 23-Nov-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3477138
Zhou XZafarani R(2020)A Survey of Fake NewsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/339504653:5(1-40)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3395046
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

On deception and deception detection: content analysis of computer-mediated stated beliefs
1. Information systems
  1. Information retrieval
    1. Document representation
  2. Information storage systems
    1. Record storage systems

Recommendations

Deception detection for news: three types of fakes
ASIST '15: Proceedings of the 78th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Information Science with Impact: Research in and for the Community

A fake news detection system aims to assist users in detecting and filtering out varieties of potentially deceptive news. The prediction of the chances that a particular news item is intentionally deceptive is based on the analysis of previously seen ...
Read More
The effects of communication media and culture on deception detection accuracy

As the world "gets smaller" and more people engage in cross-cultural communications, their ability to successfully separate truth from deception can be critically important. Yet it is challenging. While deceptive communication has been studied for ...
Read More
Building a corpus of "real" texts for deception detection
IMS2017: Proceedings of the International Conference IMS-2017

Text-based deception detection is currently emerging as a vital multidisciplinary field due to its indisputable theoretical and practical value (police, security, and customs, including predatory communications, such as Internet scams). A very important ...
Read More

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image DL Hosted proceedings

ASIS&T '10: Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem - Volume 47

October 2010

824 pages

Conference Chairs:
Cathy Marshall,
Elaine Toms,
Andrew Grove

Publisher

American Society for Information Science

United States

Publication History

Published: 22 October 2010

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ASIS&T '10

ASIS&T '10: Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem

October 22 - 27, 2010

Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh

Acceptance Rates

ASIS&T '10 Paper Acceptance Rate 52 of 149 submissions, 35%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 135 of 277 submissions, 49%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

12
Total Citations
View Citations
218
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)2
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Sakhnini NChattopadhyay D(2022)A Review of Smartphone Fact-Checking Apps and their (Non) Use Among Older AdultsAdjunct Publication of the 24th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services10.1145/3528575.3551448(1-8)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3528575.3551448
Xu FSheng VWang M(2021)A Unified Perspective for Disinformation Detection and Truth Discovery in Social Sensing: A SurveyACM Computing Surveys10.1145/347713855:1(1-33)Online publication date: 23-Nov-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3477138
Zhou XZafarani R(2020)A Survey of Fake NewsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/339504653:5(1-40)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3395046
Zafarani RZhou XShu KLiu HTeredesai AKumar VLi YRosales RTerzi EKarypis G(2019)Fake News ResearchProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3292500.3332287(3207-3208)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3292500.3332287
Volkova SJang JChampin PGandon FMédini LLalmas MIpeirotis P(2018)Misleading or FalsificationCompanion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 201810.1145/3184558.3188728(575-583)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3184558.3188728
George JGiordano GTilley P(2016)Website credibility and deceiver credibilityComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.06554:C(83-93)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.065
Appling DBriscoe EHutto CGangemi ALeonardi SPanconesi A(2015)Discriminative Models for Predicting Deception StrategiesProceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web10.1145/2740908.2742575(947-952)Online publication date: 18-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2740908.2742575
Rubin VLukoianova T(2015)Truth and deception at the rhetorical structure levelJournal of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/asi.2321666:5(905-917)Online publication date: 1-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/asi.23216
Abouelenien MPérez-Rosas VMihalcea RBurzo MAli Salah ACohn JSchuller BAran OMorency LCohen P(2014)Deception detection using a multimodal approachProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction10.1145/2663204.2663229(58-65)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2663204.2663229
Rubin V(2014)TALIP Perspectives, Guest Editorial CommentaryACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing10.1145/260529213:2(1-8)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2605292
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents