Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An “Eye” for an “I”: The Challenges and Opportunities for Spotting Credibility in a Digital World

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Applied Issues in Investigative Interviewing, Eyewitness Memory, and Credibility Assessment

Abstract

Rarely a day goes by without a new scandal that involves some kind of deception or fraud that has been perpetrated with the assistance of the Internet. Commonly, these deceptions involve people lying about who they are. These kinds of identity fraud stories are particularly compelling given the apparent ease with which individuals can craft a false identity or make false statements when they are hidden behind a computer screen. While lies about some aspect of one’s identity or life are generally innocuous, this type of deception can also have disastrous consequences. The recent case of William Melchert-Dinkel illustrates this point. Melchert-Dinkel used a number of aliases, including posing as a suicidal female nurse named “li Dao” who actively encouraged individuals on the Internet to end their own lives. In a landmark decision, Judge Neuville referred to his actions as “lethal advocacy” and found that Melchert-Dinkel was guilty of aiding suicide in connection with the deaths of a Canadian female university student and an adult man in the UK.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arciuli, J., Mallard, D., & Villar, G. (2010). “Um, I can tell you’re lying”: Linguistic markers of deception versus truth telling in speech. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 397–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Back, M. D., Stopfer, J. M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S., Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., & Gosling, S.D. (2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science, 21, 372–374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, M., Nettle, D., & Roberts, G. (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology Letters, 2, 412–414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. J., Woodworth, M., & Porter, S. (in preparation). The influence of the dark triad on the ability to detect vulnerability in others.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boltz, M. G., Dyer, R. L., & Miller, A. R. (2010). Are you lying to me? Temporal cues for deception. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 458–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, G. D., & Lee, A. Y. (2005). Language of lies in prison: Linguistic classification of prisoners’ truthful and deceptive natural language. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 313–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., & Gorsky, P. (2006). Online deception: Prevalence, motivation, and emotion. Cyberpsy­chology & Behavior, 9, 54–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chamelion effect: The perception–behavior link social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Kirkendol, S. E., Kashy, D. A., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 979–995.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B. M., Kirkendol, S. E., Tang, J., & O’Brien, T. P. (1988). The motivational impairment effect in the communication of deception: Replication and extension. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12, 177–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duran, N. D., Hall, C., McCarthy, P. M., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). The linguistic correlates of conversational deception: Comparing natural language processing technologies. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 31, 439–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Does low self-regard invite victimization? Developmental Psychology, 34, 299–309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P. (2001). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage. New York, NY: Norton & Company, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A. K., & Miller, A. G. (2000). Perspective differences in the construal of lies: Is deception in the eye of the beholder? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haley, K. J., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2005). Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 245–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T. (2004). Verbal irony use in computer-mediated and face-to-face conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 447–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T. (2007). Digital deception: When, where and how people lie online. In K. McKenna, T. Postmes, U. Reips, & A. N. Joinson (Eds.), Oxford handbook of internet psychology (pp. 287–301). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T., Curry, L., Goorha, S., & Woodworth, M. T. (2008). On lying and being lied to: A linguistic analysis of deception. Discourse Processes, 45, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J.T. & Gonzales, A. (in press) To lie or not to lie online: The pragmatics of deception in computer-mediated communication. In S. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.) Handbook of pragmatics of computer-mediated communication. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T., Woodworth, M. T., & Goorha, S. (2010). See no evil: The effect of communication medium and motivation on deception detection. Group Decision and Negotiation, 19, 327–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T., Woodworth, M., & Porter, S. (2011). Hungry like the wolf: A word pattern analysis of the language of psychopaths. Legal and Criminological Psychology. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02025.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Teicher, E. A. (2010). Who is James Bond? The dark triad as an agentic social style. Individual Differences Research, 8, 111–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, R. (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and deception in contemporary life. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults. In Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adult.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Hancock, J. T., Zhang, G., Xu, R., Markowitz, D., & Bazarova, N. (2012). Exploring linguistic features for deception detection in unstructured text. Presentation at the Proceedings of the International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, J. N., & Patterson, K. D. W. (2009). Deception in business networks: Is it easier to lie online? Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 537–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, D., Hancock, J. T., & Bazarova, N. (2011). The language of presidential lies: How words can reflect lies about war, personal scandal and state secrets. Presentation at the 97th Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. L., Pennebaker, J. W., Berry, D. S., & Richards, J. M. (2003). Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 665–675.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oberlander, J., & Gill, A. J. (2006). Language with character: A stratified corpus comparison of individual differences in e-mail communication. Discourse Process, 42, 239–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ott, M., Cardie, C., Choi, Y., & Hancock, J.T. (2011). Finding deceptive opinion spam by any stretch of the imagination. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2011), 309–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). The secret life of pronouns. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perloff, R. (2002). The third person effect. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 489–505). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S., & Woodworth, M. (2007). “I’m sorry I did it … but he started it”: A comparison of the official and self-reported homicide descriptions of psychopaths and non-psychopaths. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 91–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S., Woodworth, M., & Birt, A. R. (2000). Truth, lies, and videotape: An investigation of the ability of federal parole officers to detect deception. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 643–658.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, L. (1991). Lying: Thoughts of an applied social psychologist. American Psychologist, 46, 409–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tausczik, Y., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toma, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2012). What lies beneath: The linguistic traces of deception in online dating profiles. Journal of Communication, 62, 78–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toma, C., Jiang, C., & Hancock, J. T. (under review). The deception-media double standard: ­Self-other asymmetry in beliefs about deception across media. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. West Sussex, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij, A., Edward, K., Roberts, K. P., & Bull, R. (2000). Detecting deceit via analysis of verbal and nonverbal behavior. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 239–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warkentin, D., Woodworth, M., Hancock, J.T., & Cormier, N. (2010). Warrants and deception in computer mediated communication. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW2012), 9-12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S., Book, A., & Costello, K. (2009). Psychopathic traits and perceptions of victim vulnerability. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 635–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodworth, M., Hancock, J., Agar, A., Cormier, N., & Carpenter, T. (2010). Suspicion in synchronous computer-mediated communication: Preliminary results. Presentation at the Proceedings of the International Conference on System Science, Hawaii, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodworth, M., & Waschbusch, D. (2008). Emotional processing in children with conduct problems and callous/unemotional traits. Child: Care, Health and Development, 34, 234–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cornell University, New York, USA

    Jeff Hancock

  2. University of British Columbia – Okanagan, Vancouver, Canada

    Michael Woodworth

Authors
  1. Jeff Hancock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Woodworth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeff Hancock .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Forensic Alliance, Main Street, Suite #503 2818, Vancouver, V5T 0C1, British Columbia, Canada

    Barry S. Cooper

  2. Gerichts- und Rechtspsychologie, Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftliche, Rablstraße 45, München, 81669, Germany

    Dorothee Griesel

  3. , Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, West Mall 2329, Vancouver, V6T 1Z4, British Columbia, Canada

    Marguerite Ternes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hancock, J., Woodworth, M. (2013). An “Eye” for an “I”: The Challenges and Opportunities for Spotting Credibility in a Digital World. In: Cooper, B., Griesel, D., Ternes, M. (eds) Applied Issues in Investigative Interviewing, Eyewitness Memory, and Credibility Assessment. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation