• Title/Summary/Keyword: Deception Cues

Search Result 4, Processing Time 0.016 seconds

Paralinguistic Behavior as a Deception Cue (거짓말의 단서로서 준언어행위)

  • Kim, Daejoong;Park, Jihye
    • The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
    • /
    • v.19 no.4
    • /
    • pp.187-196
    • /
    • 2019
  • This experimental study examines whether paralinguistic behavior is a deception cue in an interrogation. 92 college students participated in an experiment and were randomly assigned to two conditions. Participant were then asked to take the money or not to take the money according to the condition they were assigned. Then participants had a face-to-face interrogation. During the interrogation, participants' paralinguistic behavior was recorded and used for coding and analysis. Results reveal that participants' paralinguistic behaviors differ depending on question types and deceptive paralinguistic cues are speech speed and fillers for the closed critical question and response latency, response length, and fillers for the open critical question. These findings implicate that part of paralinguistic behavior could be a deception cue and thus these cues might be applicable to deception detection in real world criminal investigations.

Subjective Indicators of Deception Detection in High/Low Stake Situations: Comparison among University Students and Prison Officers and Prisoners (이해득실 상황에 따른 거짓말 탐지에 대한 주관적 지표 - 대학생, 교도관, 재소자들을 대상으로 -)

  • Woo Byoung Jhon;Si Up Kim
    • Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
    • /
    • v.11 no.4
    • /
    • pp.1-22
    • /
    • 2005
  • Purposes of this study was as following; What differences do subjective indicators of deception detection according to high and low stake situations? Does groups difference appear in beliefs about deception cues? Is what differences between objective indicators and subjective indicators of deceptions? Participants of this study were consisted of university students, prison officers, prisoners. They completed a questionnaire concerning beliefs about 21 verbal and nonverbal behaviours in high/low-stake situations. For each behaviour, they were asked to rate on a seven-point scale how are these behaviours changed comparing to normal times. The results were that subjective indicators of deception were no differences between high-stake and low-stake situations, and no differences among groups. Also, it appeared that the subjective indicators of deception were substantly different from the objective indicators of deception.

Detecting lies through suspect's nonverbal behaviors in the investigation scene (군 수사현장에서 용의자의 비언어적 행동을 이용한 거짓말 탐지)

  • Si Up Kim;Woo Byoung Jhon;Chung Hyun Jeon
    • Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
    • /
    • v.12 no.2
    • /
    • pp.101-114
    • /
    • 2006
  • This study was examined the effective nonverbal behavior cues of detecting suspects' lies in the investigation scene. In order to search the suspects who drank the alcohol liquor without a permission, 18 soldiers were interviewed. 8 solders had drunken alcohol and had lied when was asked(lie group). The other 10 soldiers hadn't drunken alcohol and had told the truth(truth group). The mean frequencies of nonverbal behaviors were compared lie group with truth group. The following behaviors were measured by frequency: vocal characteristics (high pitch of voice, speech hesitations, speech error, frequency of pauses, period of pauses, latency period), facial characteristics (gaze, smile, touching face, blinking, facial micro-expression), body movement (illustrators, hand and finger movement, leg and foot movement, head movement, trunk movement, shifting position). As results, this study found that deception cues were periods and frequencies of pause, micro-expression, head movements. The lie group had less periods and frequencies of pause, and more micro-expression, head movements than truth group. But, this study didn't found Othello's error cues.

Too Much Information - Trying to Help or Deceive? An Analysis of Yelp Reviews

  • Hyuk Shin;Hong Joo Lee;Ruth Angelie Cruz
    • Asia pacific journal of information systems
    • /
    • v.33 no.2
    • /
    • pp.261-281
    • /
    • 2023
  • The proliferation of online customer reviews has completely changed how consumers purchase. Consumers now heavily depend on authentic experiences shared by previous customers. However, deceptive reviews that aim to manipulate customer decision-making to promote or defame a product or service pose a risk to businesses and buyers. The studies investigating consumer perception of deceptive reviews found that one of the important cues is based on review content. This study aims to investigate the impact of the information amount of review on the review truthfulness. This study adopted the Information Manipulation Theory (IMT) as an overarching theory, which asserts that the violations of one or more of the Gricean maxim are deceptive behaviors. It is regarded as a quantity violation if the required information amount is not delivered or more information is delivered; that is an attempt at deception. A topic modeling algorithm is implemented to reveal the distribution of each topic embedded in a text. This study measures information amount as topic diversity based on the results of topic modeling, and topic diversity shows how heterogeneous a text review is. Two datasets of restaurant reviews on Yelp.com, which have Filtered (deceptive) and Unfiltered (genuine) reviews, were used to test the hypotheses. Reviews that contain more diverse topics tend to be truthful. However, excessive topic diversity produces an inverted U-shaped relationship with truthfulness. Moreover, we find an interaction effect between topic diversity and reviews' ratings. This result suggests that the impact of topic diversity is strengthened when deceptive reviews have lower ratings. This study contributes to the existing literature on IMT by building the connection between topic diversity in a review and its truthfulness. In addition, the empirical results show that topic diversity is a reliable measure for gauging information amount of reviews.