首页> 外文期刊>Group decision and negotiation >Communicating Deception: Differences in Language Use, Justifications, and Questions for Lies, Omissions, and Truths
【24h】

Communicating Deception: Differences in Language Use, Justifications, and Questions for Lies, Omissions, and Truths

机译:沟通欺骗:语言使用,理由和谎言,遗漏和真理问题的差异

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The use of linguistics to detect deception is a growing field of study. This experiment used naturally-occurring deception to test the propositions and fundamental assumptions of this line of inquiry. One participant (allocator) was given 6dollars to divide between herself and another participant (receiver). Receivers were not told how much money allocators received. In 1/3 of interactions, the recipient was deceived either with a lie or deceptive omission. Linguistic differences associated with deception (fewer first person pronouns) were found for lies and omission, but higher word count was only found for omission. We found no evidence of a relationship between negative emotion and linguistic factors related to emotion (negative emotion words, negations, pronouns). Coding of justifications found allocators used more justifications for their offers when recipient was suspicious. Liars used more justifications providing details about how they obtained the money. Justifications about offer fairness were related to increased detection accuracy.
机译:使用语言学来检测欺骗是一个不断发展的研究领域。本实验使用自然发生的欺骗手段来测试此询问系列的命题和基本假设。一个参与者(分配者)被分配了6美元,以在自己和另一参与者(接收者)之间分配。接收者没有被告知分配者收到了多少钱。在1/3的互动中,接受者被欺骗或谎言或欺骗性遗漏。谎言和遗漏发现了与欺骗相关的语言差异(第一人称代词较少),但遗漏却发现了较高的字数。我们没有发现负面情绪与与情绪有关的语言因素(负面情绪词,否定词,代词)之间存在关系的证据。理由编码发现,当收款人可疑时,分配者将更多理由用于其要约。说谎者使用了更多的理由,详细说明了如何获得这笔钱。有关报价公平性的理由与提高检测准确性有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号