Analysing Deception in Written Witness Statements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5195/lesli.2013.2Keywords:
detecting deception, witness statements, narratives, linguistic strategy, text analysisAbstract
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 en effective vehicle for identifying deception.
References
Adams, S.H. & Jarvis, J.P. (2006). Indicators of veracity and deception: an analysis of written statements made to police. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 13 (1), 1-22.
Anolli, L., Balconi, M. & Ciceri, R. (2003). Linguistic styles in deceptive communication: dubitative ambiguity and elliptic eluding in packaged lies. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 687-710.
Barthes, R. (1996). An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. In Onega, S. & Landa, J.A. (eds) Narratology. New York: Longman.
Bestgen, Y. & the Psycholinguistics Group of the Spatial Framing Adverbials Project (2009). The discourse function of sentence-initial adverbials: studies in comprehension. Linguistic & Psycholinguistic Approaches to Text Structuring Conference, 7-14. Paris.
Buller, D.B. & Burgoon, J.K. (1996). Interpersonal Deception Theory. Communication, 6, 203-242.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buller, D.B. & Burgoon, J.K. (1994). Deception: strategic and nonstrategic communications.
In Daly, J.A. & Wieman, J.M. (eds), Strategic Interpersonal Communication, 191-223. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Burgoon, J.K., Blair, J.P., Qin, T. & Nunamaker Jr, J.F. (2003). Detecting deception through linguistic analysis. Proceedings of the Symposium on Intelligence and Security Informatics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Burgoon, J.K. & Qin, T. (2006). The dynamic nature of deceptive verbal communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 25 (1), 76-96.
DePaulo, B.M. & Kirkendol, S.E. (1989). The Motivational Impairment Effect in the communication of deception. In Yuille, J.C. (ed) Credibility Assessment. Netherlands Kluwer Academic.
DePaulo, B.M., Lindsay, J.J., Malone, B.E., Muhlenbruck, L. Charlton, K. & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychology Bulletin, 129(1), 74-118.
Dulaney Jr, E.F. (1982). Changes in language behavior as a function of veracity. Human Communication Research, 9, 75-82.
Ekman, P. (2001). Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage. 3rd edition. London: W.W. Norton & Company.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1971). Linguistic function and literary style: an inquiry into the language of William Golding’s The Inheritors. In Webster, J.J. (ed) Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse: Volume 2 (Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday). London: Continuum.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1973). Explorations in the Function of Language (Explorations in Language Study). London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Halliday, M.A.K. & Mathiessen, C. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd edition. London: Hodder Education.
Hancock, J.T., Curry, L.E., Goorha, S. & Woodworth, M.T. (2005). Automated linguistic analysis of deceptive and truthful synchronous computer-mediated communication. HICCS, 1, 22c.
Johnson, M.K., Bush, J.G., & Mitchell, K.J. (1998). Interpersonal reality monitoring: Judging the sources of other people's memories. Social Cognition, 16, 199-224.
Johnson, M.K., Foley, M.A., Suengas, A.G. & Raye, C.L. (1988). Phenomenal characteristics of memories for perceived and imagined autobiographical events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117(4), 371-376.
Knapp, M.L., Hart, R.P. & Dennis, H.S. (1974). An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 1, 15-29.
Kuiken, D. (1981). Nonimmediate language style and inconsistency between private and expressed evaluations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 183-196.
Labov, W. (1997). Some further steps in narrative analysis. The Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7, 395-415.
Labov, W. (2001). Uncovering the Event Structure of Narrative. Georgetown University Round Table. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Labov, W. & Waletsky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis. In Helm, J. (ed.) Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Memon, A., Vrij, A. & Bull, R. (2003). Psychology and Law. 2nd edition. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Prideaux, G.D. (1989). Text data as evidence for language processing principles: the grammar of ordered events. Language Sciences, 11(1), 27-42.
Rabon, D. (1996). Investigative Discourse Analysis. North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press.
Rudacille, W.C. (1994). Identifying Lies in Disguise. Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.
Sapir, A. (1987). Scientific Content Analysis. Phoenix: Laboratory for Scientific Interrogation.
Valacich, J.S., Dennis, A.R. & Nunamaker, J.F. (1992). Group size and anonymity effects on computer-mediated idea generation. Small Group Research, 2(1), 49-73.
Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting Lies and Deceit: Pitfalls and Opportunities. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2001). Telling and detecting lies in a high-stake situation: The case of a convicted murderer. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15, 187-203.
Vrij, A., Semin, G.R. & Bull, R. (1996). Insight in behavior displayed during deception. Human Communication Research, 22, 544-562.
White, C.H. & Burgoon, J.K. (2001). Adaptation and communicative design: patterns of interaction in truthful and deceptive conversation. Human Communication Research, 27, 9-37.
Woodworth, M., Hancock, J. & Goorha, S. (2005). The Motivational Enhancement Effect: implications for our chosen modes of communication in the 21st century. Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
Zhou, L., Burgoon, J.K. & Twitchell, D.P. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of language behavior of deception in email. In Chen, H., Moore, R., Zeng, D. & Leavitt, J. (eds) Intelligence and Security Informatics, 2665, 102-110.
Zhou, L. & Zhang, D. (2006). A comparison of deceptive behavior in dyad and triadic group decision making in synchronous Computer-mediated communication. Small Group Research, 7(2), 140-164.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licenseor its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 7 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
