When context matters: how false, truthful, and genre-related communication styles are revealed in language

References

• Ariely, D. (2012). The (honest) truth about dishonesty: How we lie to everyone – especially ourselves. New York: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Blackburn, K. G., Yilmaz, G., & Boyd, R. L. (2018). Food for thought: Exploring how people think and talk about food online. Appetite, 123, 390–401. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2018.01.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blair, J. P., Levine, T. R., & Shaw, A. S. (2010). Content in context improves deception detection accuracy. Human Communication Research, 36, 423–442. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01382.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohner, G. (2001). Writing about rape: Use of the passive voice and other distancing text features as an expression of perceived responsibility of the victim. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 515–529. doi: 10.1348/014466601164957
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_2
   PubMed Web of Science ®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. doi:10.1002/acp.108 doi: 10.1002/acp.1087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd, R. L. (2018). Meaning extraction helper. Retrieved from https://meh.ryanb.cc/
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, R. L., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2015a). Did Shakespeare write double falsehood? Identifying individuals by creating psychological signatures with text analysis. Psychological Science, 26, 570–582. doi: 10.1177/0956797614566658
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd, R. L., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2015b). A way with words: Using language for psychological science in the modern era. In C. Dimofte, C. Haugtvedt, & R. Yalch (Eds.), Consumer psychology in a social media world (pp. 222–236). New York City: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Buller, D. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6, 203–242. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00127.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burleson, B. R. (2009). The nature of interpersonal communication: A message-centered approach. In C. R. Berger, M. E. Roloff, & D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen (Eds.), The handbook of communication science (pp. 145–165). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M., & Moffitt, K. (2014). Automated deception detection of 911 call transcripts. Security Informatics, 3, 1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13388-014-0008-2
   Google Scholar
• Cantarero, K., Szarota, P., Stamkou, E., Navas, M., & Dominguez Espinosa, A. d. C. (2018). When is a lie acceptable? Work and private life lying acceptance depends on its beneficiary. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158, 220–235. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2017.1327404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, C. K., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008). Revealing dimensions of thinking in open-ended self-descriptions: An automated meaning extraction method for natural language. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 96–132. doi: 10.1016/J.JRP.2007.04.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/10096-006
   Google Scholar
• Cohn, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Linguistic markers of psychological change surrounding September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 15, 687–693. doi:10.2307/40064028 doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00741.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2018). Police officers’ perceptions of statement inconsistency. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 009385481875880. doi: 10.1177/0093854818758808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DePaulo, B. M., Malone, B. E., Lindsay, J. J., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74–118. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eichstaedt, J. C., Smith, R. J., Merchant, R. M., Ungar, L. H., Crutchley, P., Preoţiuc-Pietro, D., … Schwartz, H. A. (2018). Facebook language predicts depression in medical records. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 11203–11208. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1802331115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekman, P. (2001). Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, A. D., Brunet, M. K., Talwar, V., Bala, N., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Lee, K. (2011). The effects of repetition on children’s true and false reports. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 18, 529–541. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2011.615808
   Google Scholar
• Hancock, J. T., Curry, L. E., Goorha, S., & Woodworth, M. (2007). On lying and being lied to: A linguistic analysis of deception in computer-mediated communication. Discourse Processes, 45, 1–23. doi: 10.1080/01638530701739181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Stromwall, L., Wolf, A. G., Vrij, A., & Hjelmsäter, E. R. a. (2011). Detecting deception in suspects: Verbal cues as a function of interview strategy. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17, 643–656. doi: 10.1080/10683160903446982
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauch, V., Blandón-Gitlin, I., Masip, J., & Sporer, S. L. (2015). Are computers effective lie detectors? A meta-analysis of linguistic cues to deception. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 307–342. doi: 10.1177/1088868314556539
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: H. Holt and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1968). Shorter articles and notes the interpretation of the passive voice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 69–73. doi: 10.1080/14640746808400129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67–85. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.67
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kacewicz, E., Pennebaker, J. W., Davis, M., Jeon, M., & Graesser, A. C. (2014). Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 125–143. doi: 10.1177/0261927x13502654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knapp, M., Daly, J., Albada, K., & Miller, G. (2002). Backgrounds and current trends in the study of interpersonal communication. In M. Knapp, & J. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 3–20). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Knapp, M. L., Hart, R. P., & Dennis, H. S. (1974). An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 1, 15–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1974.tb00250.x
   Google Scholar
• Larcker, D. F., & Zakolyukina, A. A. (2012). Detecting deceptive discussions in conference calls. Journal of Accounting Research, 50, 495–540. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00450.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, C.-C., Welker, R. B., & Odom, M. D. (2009). Features of computer-mediated text-based messages that support automatable, linguistics-based indicators for deception detection. Journal of Information Systems, 23, 5–24. doi: 10.2308/jis.2009.23.1.24
   Google Scholar
• Leins, D. A., Fisher, R. P., & Ross, S. J. (2013). Exploring liars’ strategies for creating deceptive reports. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18, 141–151. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2011.02041.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2010). A few transparent liars explaining 54% accuracy in deception detection experiments. Annals of the International Communication Association, 34, 41–61. doi: 10.1080/23808985.2010.11679095
   Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2014). Truth-Default Theory (TDT): A theory of human deception and deception detection. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 378–392. doi: 10.1177/0261927x14535916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2018a). Ecological validity and deception detection research design. Communication Methods and Measures, 12, 45–54. doi: 10.1080/19312458.2017.1411471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R. (2018b). Scientific evidence and cue theories in deception research: Reconciling findings from meta-analyses and primary experiments. International Journal of Communication, 12, 19. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/7838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., & Daiku, Y. (2019). How custom agents really detect lies. Communication Research Reports, 36, 84–92. doi: 10.1080/08824096.2018.1555523
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Serota, K. B., Shulman, H., Clare, D. D., Park, H. S., Shaw, A. S., … Lee, J. H. (2011). Sender demeanor: Individual differences in sender believability have a powerful impact on deception detection judgments. Human Communication Research, 37, 377–403. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01407.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Shaw, A., & Shulman, H. C. (2010). Increasing deception detection accuracy with strategic questioning. Human Communication Research, 36, 216–231. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01374.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litt, E. (2012). Knock, knock. Who's there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 330–345. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2012.705195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowitz, D. M. (2018). Academy Awards speeches reflect social status, cinematic roles, and winning expectations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37, 376–387. doi: 10.1177/0261927x17751012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowitz, D. M., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Linguistic traces of a scientific fraud: The case of Diederik Stapel. PLOS ONE, 9, e105937. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105937
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowitz, D. M., & Hancock, J. T. (2016). Linguistic obfuscation in fraudulent science. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35, 435–445. doi: 10.1177/0261927X15614605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowitz, D. M., & Hancock, J. T. (2018). Deception in mobile dating conversations. Journal of Communication, 68, 547–569. doi: 10.1093/joc/jqy019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowitz, D. M., & Hancock, J. T. (2019). Deception and language: The Contextual Organization of Language and Deception (COLD) framework. In T. Docan-Morgan (Ed.), The palgrave handbook of deceptive communication (pp. 193–212). Backingstroke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• McCornack, S. A., Morrison, K., Paik, J. E., Wisner, A. M., & Zhu, X. (2014). Information manipulation theory 2: A propositional theory of deceptive discourse production. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 348–377. doi: 10.1177/0261927x14534656
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nahari, G. (2016). When the long road is the shortcut: A comparison between two coding methods for content-based lie-detection tools. Psychology, Crime & Law, 22, 1000–1014. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2016.1207770
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nahari, G. (2018). The applicability of the verifiability approach to the real world. In J. P. Rosenfeld (Ed.), Detecting concealed information and deception: Recent developments (pp. 329–349). London: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Nahari, G., Ashkenazi, T., Fisher, R. P., Granhag, P.-A., Hershkowitz, I., Masip, J., … Vrij, A. (2019). ‘Language of lies’: Urgent issues and prospects in verbal lie detection research. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24, 1–23. doi: 10.1111/lcrp.12148
   Web of Science ®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. doi: 10.1177/0146167203029005010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). The secret life of pronouns: What our words say about us. London: Bloomsbury Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., Boyd, R. L., & Francis, M. E. (2015). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC2015. Austin, TX: Pennebaker Conglomerates.
   Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC2007. Austin, TX: Pennebaker Conglomerates.
   Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C. K., Frazee, J., Lavergne, G. M., Beaver, D. I., & Gong, Q. (2014). When small words foretell academic success: The case of college admissions essays. PLOS ONE, 9, e115844. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115844
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petkova, K. G., Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1995). Salience of anti-abortion beliefs and commitment to an attitudinal position: On the strength, structure, and predictive validity of anti-abortion attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 463–483. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01762.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serota, K. B. (2019). Deceptive marketing outcomes: A model for marketing communications. In The palgrave handbook of deceptive communication (pp. 813–837). Backingstroke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Serota, K. B., & Levine, T. R. (2015). A few prolific liars: Variation in the prevalence of lying. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 138–157. doi: 10.1177/0261927x14528804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Street, C. N. H. (2015). ALIED: Humans as adaptive lie detectors. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 335–343. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54. doi: 10.1177/0261927X09351676
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ten Brinke, L., & Porter, S. (2012). Cry me a river: Identifying the behavioral consequences of extremely high-stakes interpersonal deception. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 469–477. doi: 10.1037/h0093929
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Vrij, A., Semin, G. R., & Bull, R. (1996). Insight into behavior displayed during deception. Human Communication Research, 22, 544–562. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00378.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener, M., & Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication. New York: Appleton-Centry-Crofts.
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 1–59. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60369-X
   Google Scholar